Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
