Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Immense energy is expended on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been dispatched to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: several firings fired to intercept a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – 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 many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to fill in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is impossible to force Russia to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – 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 multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but averting a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its advantage.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require continued Western support.
