Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
