Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm opened up on a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to relinquish the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive 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 continue 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 people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
