Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, 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 reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
