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 stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
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 diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
