🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a ability provided through current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.