Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures 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 capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.