Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from across the border, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, probably provided by allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a automatic firearm fired at a drone close by, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the early updates: seven people killed, destruction and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from American leadership provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a principle well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be numerous efforts to end hostilities, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their attention does not switch to domestic problems. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 demonstrate particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
