Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the tension triggered by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for achieving ceasefire appeared – briefly – to have been stabilised. A senior US official spoke of "substantial progress" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of rocket attacks on Kyiv.
The Pattern of Diplomacy and Destruction
The succession of conflicting incidents captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, political struggles are waged: positive announcements are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on containing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, war remains the main instrument for achieving "settlement".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the current condition of Ukraine's exposure was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from Russian territory, a capacity provided through current data. From vantage locations, defense planes that had been deployed to intercept incoming aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by European allies.
Shortly after, Kyiv's missile defense activated: several firings deployed against a Russian ballistic missile. This was a advanced protection mechanism at work, presumably supplied through allied countries. Every firing jolts you unexpectedly, rattling buildings. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: maybe the incoming missile won't cause damage this time, protecting urban areas from devastation and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a large-caliber weapon fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably allied-provided weaponry. Unfortunately, the shots failed to hit the opposing UAV – it continued its flight toward its destination.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv greeted the daybreak reports: multiple fatalities, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the night's assault. As always, everyone still continued their routines – experiencing conflict. But those 24 hours encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a reliance that neighboring countries are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from US administration provoked deep reactions, controversy and deep concern – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have witnessed similar scenarios, after prior negotiation attempts and bilateral conferences.
Every new approach from US leadership follows the consistent cycle: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, effectively counters. They stabilise the situation but never actually achieve victory. This trend will, certainly, continue.
Political Considerations
It is easy to blame particular leaders of consistently pushing Moscow's conditions. But that does not seem to be the entire situation. US administration operates on a assumption well known to seasoned negotiators: you cannot secure via talks what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is impossible to pressure the Kremlin to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The challenge is that while accepting these circumstances, Washington does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from assuming that the current condition will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Divergent Views
Therefore, the Kremlin is confident that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its allies are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is virtually nonexistent. There may be multiple initiatives to end hostilities, but they will persist as long as Russia's leader remains supremely confident in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing lives and land but preventing a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.
Current Realities
Factually, there are no genuine requirements for a truce. Now, individual motivations are becoming relevant: leadership ambitions to mediate resolution and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and the government's double obstacles – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, 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 opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Summary and Prospects
It took a just a single week to terminate the proposed articles of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by Washington, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with pacifying measures of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all served their function.
While new proposals 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 fend off negotiation assaults from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness 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 break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the coming months, primarily depend on ongoing international assistance.
