Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, 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 specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity 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 predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
