Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, 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 based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
