🔗 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 ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, 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 plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.