🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are fought: optimistic declarations are released from multiple capitals. Significant resources is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the primary tool for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a ability afforded by current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming cruise missiles flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, most likely provided by partner states. Every firing shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Continuous Dangers

Not long after, a automatic firearm fired at a aerial vehicle close by, part of a mobile-fire group – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its destination.

Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from US administration generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, no doubt, persist.

Tactical Assessments

It is easy to blame specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle understood by seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government believes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, American administration does little to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the situation will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the coming year.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their reason to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the outcome.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but preventing a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its advantage.

Present Conditions

Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to domestic problems. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These two forces are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a just a single week to eliminate the proposed articles of the current initiative. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with pacifying measures of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on old ideas are approaching, 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 founded on Moscow's terms and show specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.