🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.