Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership sparked intense emotion, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.
