Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: 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 flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
