Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
