Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist 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 civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
