🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on containing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

Nighttime Reality

As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by Western partners.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely delivered by allied countries. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and another blackout.

Continuous Dangers

Soon after, a automatic firearm engaged a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.

Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.

Strategic Calculations

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington operates on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does minimal to prevent Kremlin actions, through statements or actions, from thinking that the current condition will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding civilians and areas but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its favour.

Existing Situation

Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: 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 unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be much harder after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These opposing factors are guiding negotiations.

Conclusion and Outlook

It took a mere seven days to terminate the 28 points of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by US administration, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.

While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, mainly require continued Western support.