Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement 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 bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans 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 based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
