Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – 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 bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, 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 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
