Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
