🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are released from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability enabled by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: possibly the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and further power outages.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The detailed framework from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.

Every new proposal from American administration unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a assumption familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the status quo will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Moscow is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the country's interests against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, 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 defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.