🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.

Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.