Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault 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, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion 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.
