Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
