Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – 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 unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
