Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership functions according to a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.