🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.

Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.

Existing Situation

Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals 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 specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures 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 predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.