Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from Washington follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
