Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons roared overhead – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through partner states. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: 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 modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
