🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action

The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – 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 American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity 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 capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.