🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been contained. A American diplomat spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are conducted: positive announcements are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is allocated on managing specific proposals. By night, the Kremlin clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".

Nocturnal Warfare

As Russia's attack developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the present situation of Ukraine's vulnerability was exposed. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from enemy soil, a ability afforded by current data. From witness perspectives, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by Western partners.

Shortly after, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles targeted at a hostile projectile. This was a modern interception technology at work, probably delivered by allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly transforms into sober acceptance: maybe the hostile projectile won't hit its mark this time, protecting urban areas from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.

Persistent Threats

Not long after, a large-caliber weapon engaged a unmanned aircraft close by, part of a rapid response unit – most likely allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the projectiles didn't strike the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its destination.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, destruction and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As always, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours demonstrated Ukraine's vital need on Western support – a dependence that European nations are evidently unprepared to replace in the short term.

Failed Diplomacy

The comprehensive proposal from American leadership generated strong feelings, debate and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after earlier high-level meetings and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a diplomatic cavalry charge against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This cycle will, undoubtedly, continue.

Tactical Assessments

It is convenient to criticize specific actors of repeatedly advocating Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration works based on a premise familiar among international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's occupied territories.

The challenge is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to discourage Russia, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the current condition will not shift further in its benefit in the near future.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Moscow is certain that the clock favors them – that Ukraine and its allies are nearing depletion. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will continue as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukraine's government believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a entire defensive failure until circumstances change in its benefit.

Current Realities

Realistically, there are no genuine requirements for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: personal goals to broker a ceasefire and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, 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 initiative Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their focus does not move to internal issues. And although their mission will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will modify their basic position.

These two forces are influencing discussions.

Summary and Prospects

It took a just a single week to eliminate the suggested clauses of the latest plan. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, pushback by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with calming attempts of representatives, and finally, recent disclosures, all did their job.

While new plans based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. 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 foreseeable future, largely rely on continued Western support.