Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
