Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, 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 rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
