Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Immense energy is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
