Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely supplied through Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the consistent cycle: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, endure.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption familiar among international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House presumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are coming close to fatigue. Their reason to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leader remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not switch to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, largely rely on continued Western support.
