🔗 Share this article

Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its destination.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The 28-point plan from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This pattern will, certainly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington functions according to a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.