Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: hopeful statements are released from multiple capitals. Immense energy is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from Russian territory, a capability provided through timely intelligence. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The instant of fear quickly becomes grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its destination.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: multiple fatalities, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those entire period illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, persist.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration presumes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is almost completely absent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter negotiation assaults from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to modify developments, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
