Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, 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 twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
