Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A senior US official spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is expended on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the primary tool for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably supplied through Western nations. Every firing creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a automatic firearm opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, damage and heating outages in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, debate and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration functions according to a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the result.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the 28 points of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on continued Western support.