Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms 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 government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
