Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: 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: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives 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 fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
