Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a ability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
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 almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
