Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity provided through current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
