Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv'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 unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
