Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. 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, primarily depend on continued Western support.
