Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern 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 issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
