Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from enemy soil, a ability provided through up-to-date information. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new plans based on old ideas 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 based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they remain united 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 capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
