Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on containing specific proposals. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are forthcoming, 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 founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
