Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
