Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
