Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations 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 modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. 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, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
