Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from different nations. Significant resources is expended on restraining certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
