Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
