Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
