🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.

Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit 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 outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives 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 much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.