Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency triggered by the presentation of a new comprehensive peace framework for resolving the conflict appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after bilateral negotiations in Geneva. On Monday night, Moscow made its response: another massive barrage of missile and drone strikes on Kyiv.
The Rhythm of Diplomacy and Destruction
The chain of opposing developments captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are conducted: hopeful statements are released from various governments. Significant resources is expended on managing certain initiatives. By night, the Kremlin brutally reminds the world that, for them, conflict continues to be the key method for achieving "peace".
Nighttime Reality
As military strikes developed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was revealed. Ukraine is capable of detecting missile launches from enemy soil, a capacity afforded by timely intelligence. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to intercept incoming cruise missiles roared overhead – modern combat jets provided to Ukraine by Western partners.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons thundered: defensive missiles targeted at a Russian ballistic missile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, most likely supplied through allied countries. Every deployment shakes the surroundings, shaking the windows. The moment of terror quickly becomes grim resignation: maybe the incoming missile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.
Ongoing Risks
Following this, a large-caliber weapon engaged a aerial vehicle in the vicinity, part of a rapid response unit – almost certainly imported technology. Regrettably, the shots failed to hit the enemy aircraft – it continued its flight toward its target.
With pauses, this continued until dawn. Kyiv awoke to the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the evening attack. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – living the war. But those full day illustrated Ukraine's essential dependence on international aid – a dependence that regional partners are clearly incapable to fill in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The 28-point plan from Washington provoked deep reactions, controversy and profound anxiety – and briefly redirected concern from Ukraine's major integrity crisis in years. Yet, we have seen this script before, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new proposal from US leadership unfolds according to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, manages to fend off. They manage the tension but never actually achieve victory. This pattern will, no doubt, continue.
Strategic Calculations
It is convenient to criticize specific actors of consistently pushing Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. Washington functions according to a premise well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have failed to defend militarily. The US administration assumes that it is unfeasible to pressure the Kremlin to relinquish the land that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.
The problem is that while acknowledging this situation, American administration does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through words or deeds, from believing that the situation will not shift further in its favour in the coming year.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is certain that duration works to their advantage – that Ukraine and its partners are approaching exhaustion. Their incentive to agree to terms that does not give them the greatest potential benefit is almost completely absent. There may be multiple initiatives to stop fighting, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains completely certain in the conclusion.
On the contrary, Kyiv believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding civilians and areas but avoiding a entire defensive failure until situations evolve in its favour.
Existing Situation
Objectively, there are no actual prerequisites for a truce. Now, subjective factors are entering the equation: leadership ambitions to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to distance important partners, and on the other, to unite the population around the national cause against any plan Kyiv finds unsuitable, so that their priority does not shift toward domestic problems. And although their task will now be much harder after current events, it remains highly unlikely that this will change their overall approach.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Conclusion and Outlook
It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the latest plan. Assertive and inconsistent approach of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the rest of Europe, along with soothing efforts of negotiators, and finally, current information leaks, all achieved their purpose.
While new proposals based on established approaches are approaching, Kyiv, London and other Western governments 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 specific hesitation to modify developments, if they remain united and strengthen their defence capabilities 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 ability to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on ongoing international assistance.
