Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
