Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack 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 witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, 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 overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
