Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
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 resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
