Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Immense energy is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching aerial threats flew past – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings targeted at a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership works based on a principle 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 unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, 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 overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, mainly require continued Western support.
