Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a premise familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
