Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit 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 outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – 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 move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
