🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.

Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv'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 unsuitable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.