Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are released from different nations. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability enabled by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
