Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – temporarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare
The chain of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Considerable effort is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity enabled by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been dispatched to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and heating outages in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
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 operates on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
