Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability provided through current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder 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 only one week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations 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 demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. 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, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
