🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.

Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new approach from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.