Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
