Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire 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 national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. 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 predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
