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 achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity 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 counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
