Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
