Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms 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 government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
