Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Significant resources is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability provided through current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. 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 influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
