Europe felt a moment of respite on Monday, as the crisis triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – briefly – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its retaliation: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of opposing developments captured the grim essence of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are fought: positive announcements are released from various governments. Considerable effort is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership forcefully demonstrates the world that, for them, war remains the key method for achieving "peace".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from Russian territory, a capability provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, Ukrainian air force fighter jets that had been deployed to counter approaching aerial threats roared overhead – modern combat jets supplied to Ukraine by NATO members.
Moments later, Kyiv's air-defence systems engaged: defensive missiles deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably supplied through allied countries. Every firing shakes the surroundings, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly transforms into resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't cause damage this time, sparing the city from ruin and further power outages.
Continuous Dangers
Following this, a heavy machine gun engaged a aerial vehicle somewhere nearby, part of a defensive team – probably imported technology. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its objective.
Periodically, this persisted until dawn. Kyiv faced the early updates: multiple fatalities, devastation and utility failures in multiple buildings as a result of the night's assault. As customarily, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those entire period demonstrated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a need that neighboring countries are clearly incapable to substitute in the short term.
Unsuccessful Negotiations
The comprehensive proposal from Washington provoked deep reactions, debate and profound anxiety – 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 initiative from Washington follows the consistent cycle: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with partner nations, manages to fend off. They stabilise the situation but never actually secure success. This trend will, no doubt, endure.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. US administration functions according to a premise understood by experienced diplomats: you cannot secure via talks what you have failed to defend militarily. The American government believes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to surrender the territory that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The challenge is that while recognising this factual reality, US leadership does little to discourage Russia, through words or deeds, from believing that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its advantage in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, the Kremlin is convinced that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are nearing depletion. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to stop fighting, but they will persist as long as Russia's government remains supremely confident in the result.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still persist, progressively conceding lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until situations evolve in its benefit.
Existing Situation
Realistically, there are no actual prerequisites for a ceasefire. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to broker a ceasefire and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the flag against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their priority does not move to internal issues. And although their task will now be considerably more difficult after latest incidents, it remains very improbable that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These two forces are guiding negotiations.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to terminate the suggested clauses of the most recent proposal. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, recent disclosures, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments should reach an essential realization: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate specific hesitation to alter the situation, if they stand together and improve their protective measures at a much faster pace. If they do, neither external pressure nor military threats will be able to defeat them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to repel nightly air assaults will, for the predictable period, mainly require sustained allied backing.
