Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
