🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A Washington representative spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are waged: positive announcements are released from multiple capitals. Considerable effort is devoted on containing particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's defenselessness was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been dispatched to intercept incoming aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets delivered to Ukraine by European allies.

Soon thereafter, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons engaged: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from devastation and additional electricity failures.

Ongoing Risks

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – almost certainly allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.

Intermittently, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: several casualties, destruction and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As always, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's vital need on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are clearly incapable to replace in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from Washington generated strong feelings, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new initiative from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, persist.

Strategic Calculations

It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a assumption well known to experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government presumes that it is impossible to compel Moscow to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.

Conflicting Perspectives

Therefore, Russian leadership is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its supporters are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leader remains completely certain in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, gradually sacrificing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.

Present Conditions

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, personal considerations are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and the government's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will modify their basic position.

These conflicting dynamics are driving the talks.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by US administration, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with soothing efforts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all achieved their purpose.

While new plans based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.