Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction 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 illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue 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 civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
