Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
