Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. 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 lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
