🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.

While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance 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 capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.