Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: 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, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
