Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
