Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures 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 draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
