Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from US administration sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of repeatedly advocating Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is impossible to force Russia to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on established approaches are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
