🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These opposing factors are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles 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 pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.

While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.