Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation 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 diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, 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 defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
