Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures 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 capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
