Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
