Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the introduction 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 aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is allocated on managing particular approaches. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.
Soon thereafter, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: multiple launches deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by allied countries. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from catastrophe and another blackout.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a mobile-fire group – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, damage and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – living the war. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that regional partners are evidently unprepared to substitute in the immediate future.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new initiative from US leadership unfolds according to the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Tactical Assessments
It is tempting to accuse certain parties of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. American leadership operates on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House presumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the areas that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, Washington does nothing to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from assuming that the situation will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is confident that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its favour.
Present Conditions
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not shift toward internal issues. And although their objective will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.
While new initiatives based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
