🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.