🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare

The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.

With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a premise well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.

The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to kill the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.

While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, 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 reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.