Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – 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 approach from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
