Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government'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 unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, 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 previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
