Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings deployed against a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership functions according to a premise understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the land that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
