Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation 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 highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
