Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Significant resources is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership follows 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, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
