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 stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions 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 initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful 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 eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas 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 founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
