Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration 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 achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, 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 counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
