Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention 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 proposal from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
