Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability afforded by current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
