Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new initiative from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
