Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
