🔗 Share this article

Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the tension sparked by the introduction of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A Washington representative spoke of "significant advancement" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Pattern of Negotiation and Warfare

The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Considerable effort is allocated on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the main instrument for achieving "resolution".

After-Dark Attacks

As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been dispatched to intercept incoming guided weapons streaked across the sky – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by European allies.

Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, shaking the windows. The instant of fear quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.

Ongoing Risks

Soon after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the hostile drone – it pressed on overhead toward its target.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: several casualties, devastation and utility failures in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still went about their day – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on Western support – a reliance that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to fill in the immediate future.

Failed Diplomacy

The 28-point plan from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and serious worry – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and international summits.

Every new approach from American administration follows the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, certainly, continue.

Political Considerations

It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration operates on a principle familiar among seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The White House assumes that it is unrealistic to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does minimal to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from believing that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.

Divergent Views

Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains highly assured in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but averting a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: political desires to broker a ceasefire and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.

These opposing factors are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a mere seven days to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of diplomats, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.

While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are founded on Moscow's terms and show particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together 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 repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.