Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from devastation and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a automatic firearm engaged a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to replace in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from Washington follows the identical sequence: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.
While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
