Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.
