Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
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 well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
