Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, 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 plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, 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 diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
