Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: 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 – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
