Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused 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, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus 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 approach from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
