Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
