Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended 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".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from across the border, a ability afforded by current data. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The US administration presumes that it is unrealistic to force Russia to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and the government's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to modify developments, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
