Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government'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 initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. 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, mainly require continued Western support.
