Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the tension sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: a renewed assault of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are fought: hopeful statements are issued from various governments. Significant resources is devoted on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As military strikes unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's defenselessness was exposed. Ukraine is able to track missile launches from Russian territory, a ability afforded by up-to-date information. From witness perspectives, defense planes that had been deployed to counter approaching cruise missiles roared overhead – advanced fighter aircraft supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through partner states. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly transforms into grim resignation: perhaps the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and further power outages.
Persistent Threats
Soon after, a large-caliber weapon opened up on a unmanned aircraft in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Sadly, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Intermittently, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: seven people killed, destruction and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's critical military reliance on international aid – a need that neighboring countries are evidently unprepared to fill in the near term.
Failed Diplomacy
The detailed framework from American leadership generated strong feelings, discussion and profound anxiety – and momentarily shifted focus from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and international summits.
Every new proposal from US leadership adheres to the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They contain the crisis but never actually secure success. This pattern will, undoubtedly, endure.
Tactical Assessments
It is convenient to criticize particular leaders of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. Washington works based on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot achieve through diplomacy what you have been unable to protect through force. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to surrender the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's occupied territories.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does minimal to deter Moscow, through diplomacy or military means, from assuming that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the coming year.
Opposing Positions
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its supporters are nearing depletion. Their reason to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still hold out, gradually sacrificing lives and land but averting a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, subjective factors are becoming relevant: personal goals to mediate resolution and secure international recognition, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any proposal Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not switch to internal issues. And although their objective will now be much harder after recent developments, it remains very improbable that this will change their overall approach.
These two forces are driving the talks.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to kill the proposed articles of the most recent proposal. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, resistance by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new proposals based on old ideas are imminent, Kyiv, London and other allied nations should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are based on Russian demands and demonstrate particular unwillingness to change the course of events, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.
