Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension caused by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been defused. 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 rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are issued from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from across the border, a ability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile aerial threats flew past – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into grim resignation: possibly the incoming missile won't hit its mark this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun opened up on a aerial vehicle close by, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.
Every new proposal from Washington unfolds according to the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Political Considerations
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 operates on a premise 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 unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, US leadership does nothing to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from thinking that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a total frontline collapse until circumstances change in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any proposal Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a mere seven days to kill the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the predictable period, mainly require ongoing international assistance.
