Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government'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 focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
