Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a ability enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
