🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.

With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from Washington follows the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.

While new proposals based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.