Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are released from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a automatic firearm fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from American administration follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition 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 previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.
