Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare
The succession of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: hopeful statements are delivered from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on containing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through timely intelligence. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles flew past – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun engaged a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its objective.
Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: several casualties, damage and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are evidently unprepared to replace in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from Washington 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 achieve victory. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership operates on a assumption understood by international relations experts: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it currently occupies in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does minimal to discourage Russia, through statements or actions, from assuming that the status quo will not change more in its advantage in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin 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 close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing people and territory but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its favour.
Current Realities
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and achieve global acclaim, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a mere seven days to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all did their job.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
