🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a ability enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a negotiation push 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.

Tactical Assessments

It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations 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 country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.