Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a ability enabled by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, 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 reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
