Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Significant resources is allocated on restraining particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor rocket firings from across the border, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From observation points, military aircraft that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably delivered by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes sober acceptance: possibly the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a defensive team – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and multilateral gatherings.
Every new approach from Washington follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame certain parties of repeatedly advocating Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a principle well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is impossible to force Russia to abandon the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not change more in its advantage in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that duration works to their advantage – 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 numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and the government's double obstacles – 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 unsuitable, so that their focus does not move to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after recent developments, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Assessment and Future
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and show specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the coming months, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
