Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official 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 Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Significant resources is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire 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 unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
