Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension caused by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: maybe the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – 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 proposal from Washington follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that time is on his side – 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 leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
