Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are released from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from Russian territory, a capability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly transforms into sober acceptance: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from American administration follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: personal goals to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
