Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in many homes 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 external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
