🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity provided through current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.

Strategic Calculations

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem 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 benefit in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership'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 unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.