Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
