Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – 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 close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
