Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity afforded by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone close by, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its target.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans 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 diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
