Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from across the border, a ability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
