Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is expended on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As Russia's attack unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from across the border, a capability provided through current data. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been scrambled to engage hostile cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by European allies.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably provided by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The brief panic quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the hostile projectile won't cause damage this time, preventing destruction from ruin and another blackout.
Continuous Dangers
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely imported technology. Sadly, the bullets missed the opposing UAV – it maintained course toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the daybreak reports: seven people killed, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a need that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, debate and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after earlier high-level meetings and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the whole story. US administration functions according to a assumption 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 force Russia to abandon the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The issue is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the near future.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still hold out, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its favour.
Existing Situation
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are entering the equation: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their attention does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will modify their basic position.
These opposing factors are driving the talks.
Summary and Prospects
It took a only one week to eliminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are imminent, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect certain reluctance to change the course of events, if they remain united and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to repel nightly air assaults will, for the foreseeable future, mainly require sustained allied backing.
