Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes 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, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes 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 ability afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
