Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" 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 Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability enabled by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly gives way to sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative 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 change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
