Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
