Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington works based on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.
