Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
