Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
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 projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters 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 leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
