🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

Nighttime Reality

As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire 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 country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.

While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.