Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the crisis sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its countermove: a renewed assault of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from various governments. Immense energy is allocated on managing certain initiatives. By night, Moscow brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the main instrument for achieving "peace".
Nocturnal Warfare
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting projectile deployments from enemy soil, a capability afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to engage hostile guided weapons flew past – advanced fighter aircraft provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Moments later, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, most likely provided by Western nations. Every deployment creates sudden vibrations, rattling buildings. The brief panic quickly gives way to grim resignation: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Persistent Threats
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the bullets missed the enemy aircraft – it pressed on overhead toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: several casualties, damage and heating outages in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As typically, everyone still maintained normal activities – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on Western support – a dependence that regional partners are demonstrably unable to replace in the near term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, discussion and profound anxiety – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from American administration follows the same pattern: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with allied governments, effectively counters. They contain the crisis but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. Washington works based on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The White House assumes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the land that it currently occupies in Ukraine's south or east.
The issue is that while acknowledging this situation, Washington does nothing to deter Moscow, through words or deeds, from thinking that the current condition will not evolve additionally in its benefit in the months ahead.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is close to zero. There may be many attempts to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains completely certain in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but avoiding a total frontline collapse until conditions improve in its advantage.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Ukrainian leadership's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their focus does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.
These conflicting dynamics are guiding negotiations.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by US administration, resistance by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on previous concepts are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and reflect particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and improve their protective measures at a significantly accelerated rate. 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 predictable period, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
