Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
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 assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
