Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – 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 multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – 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 unworkable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
