Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration works based on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
