Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
