🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

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 enemy soil, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, 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 capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.