🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates 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 exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.

Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, continue.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.