Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis 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 "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity 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 ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
