Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As always, 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 clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington operates on a assumption well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
