Europe experienced widespread 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 contained. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability provided through current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, damage and infrastructure problems in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from Washington sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require sustained allied backing.
