Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
