Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. 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, mainly require continued Western support.
