Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
