Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, 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 full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.