Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal 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 allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington functions according to a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv'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 unworkable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
