Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a assumption understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms 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 leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives 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 counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
