Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – 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 attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals 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 reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
