Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
