Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack 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 fought: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to counter approaching guided weapons streaked across the sky – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense engaged: several firings targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, discussion and deep concern – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption familiar among experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: personal goals to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to domestic problems. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 show certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a much faster pace. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
