🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: an extensive attack of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The chain of contrasting events captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on containing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capacity afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by Western partners.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly becomes sober acceptance: perhaps the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – probably imported technology. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Periodically, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – living the war. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that European nations are clearly incapable to substitute in the immediate future.

Ineffective Peace Efforts

The comprehensive proposal from US administration provoked deep reactions, discussion and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration unfolds according to the same pattern: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This trend will, no doubt, continue.

Political Considerations

It is tempting to accuse particular leaders of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to relinquish the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The issue is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not change more in its benefit in the near future.

Divergent Views

Therefore, Moscow is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their motivation to agree to terms that does not give them the maximum possible gain is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing people and territory but averting a total frontline collapse until situations evolve in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's twin challenges – 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 unacceptable, so that their priority does not switch to internal issues. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are influencing discussions.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on established approaches are imminent, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and reflect specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.