🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming 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 Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.