Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability enabled by up-to-date information. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that European nations are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a principle understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: political desires to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
