Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
