Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
