Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: positive announcements are issued from different nations. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a capability provided through current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably provided by partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
