Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict 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 response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This cycle will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures 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 ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
