Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
