Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
