Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new 28-article proposal for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation 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 ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
