🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on managing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

After-Dark Attacks

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability afforded by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Continuous Dangers

Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a drone close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: multiple fatalities, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The comprehensive proposal from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership works based on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, 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 founded on Moscow's terms and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on continued Western support.