🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive 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 supremely confident in the result.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.