Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – 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 approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches 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 founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
