Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by current data. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. 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 US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together 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 ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
