Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are released from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
