Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
