Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – 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 multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
