🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been contained. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is allocated on managing certain initiatives. 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 military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly gives way to sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the short term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its benefit in the months ahead.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Moscow is confident that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.

Current Realities

Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to kill the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks 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 much faster pace. 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 ongoing international assistance.