Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. 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 defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain 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 circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals 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 reflect particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
