Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are issued from various governments. Immense energy is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate 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 Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
