Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
