Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
