Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: 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 stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
