Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Significant resources is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity enabled by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason 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 persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity 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 foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
