Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-point plan for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability enabled by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that European nations are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
