Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a ability enabled by current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every deployment jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue 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 total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
