Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone close by, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a premise familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
