🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, 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 hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.