Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill 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 experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
