🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, continue.

Strategic Calculations

It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.

Existing Situation

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.

While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.