Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
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 negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
