🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its retaliation: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action

The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "settlement".

Nighttime Reality

As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, defense planes that had been dispatched to engage hostile cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by European allies.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: multiple launches targeted at a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through Western nations. Every launch creates sudden vibrations, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.

Ongoing Risks

Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.

With pauses, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.

Unsuccessful Negotiations

The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – 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 approach from US leadership follows the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, continue.

Political Considerations

It is easy to blame certain parties of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming 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 approaching exhaustion. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.

Existing Situation

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.

These two forces are guiding negotiations.

Summary and Prospects

It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.