Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from enemy soil, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
