Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
