Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction 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, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from multiple capitals. Immense energy is devoted on restraining certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a principle familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
