🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".

Nighttime Reality

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new approach from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.