Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – 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 initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
