🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, continue.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its favour in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.