Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its countermove: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is confident 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 largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
