Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A American diplomat spoke of "significant advancement" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: a renewed assault of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction
The sequence of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Immense energy is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the primary tool for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is equipped to monitor missile launches from enemy soil, a capability enabled by current data. From observation points, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense thundered: multiple launches fired to intercept a incoming threat. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely delivered by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to grim resignation: possibly the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a drone somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly Western-made equipment. Sadly, the projectiles didn't strike the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its objective.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: multiple fatalities, devastation and heating outages in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those full day demonstrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a reliance that regional partners are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration generated strong feelings, controversy and deep concern – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and international summits.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This cycle will, certainly, persist.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington operates on a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have been unable to protect through force. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the near future.
Divergent Views
Therefore, Moscow is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their motivation to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is virtually nonexistent. There may be many attempts to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, slowly losing civilians and areas but preventing a entire defensive failure until conditions improve in its benefit.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, subjective factors are coming into play: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their attention does not shift toward internal issues. And although their mission will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains quite doubtful that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a mere seven days to terminate the suggested clauses of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to fend off diplomatic offensives from Washington that are based on Russian demands and reflect certain reluctance to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the coming months, primarily depend on continued Western support.
