Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan 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 witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires 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 unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
