Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
