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 – temporarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of contrasting events captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Considerable effort is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
Nighttime Reality
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a ability afforded by current data. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, presumably delivered by Western nations. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, sparing the city from ruin and additional electricity failures.
Ongoing Risks
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it pressed on overhead toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those entire period encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a need that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The 28-point plan from Washington sparked intense emotion, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership adheres to the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This pattern will, no doubt, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a premise well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the land that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from assuming that the status quo will not shift further in its advantage in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but avoiding a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its favour.
Current Realities
Objectively, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: political desires to negotiate peace and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not move to internal issues. And although their mission 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.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new initiatives based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to change the course of events, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, largely rely on continued Western support.
