Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, 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 proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, 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 particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
