Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely 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 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
