🔗 Share this article

Europe breathed a deep collective sigh of relief on Monday, as the diplomatic emergency sparked by the announcement of a new comprehensive peace framework for ending the war appeared – momentarily – to have been stabilised. A American diplomat spoke of "notable headway" after diplomatic discussions in Geneva. On Monday night, Russian leadership made its response: an extensive attack of rocket attacks on Kyiv.

The Cycle of Diplomacy and Destruction

The succession of opposing developments captured the harsh reality of the outgoing year. By day, diplomatic battles are waged: optimistic declarations are delivered from different nations. Immense energy is devoted on restraining particular approaches. By night, Russian leadership brutally reminds the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "peace".

After-Dark Attacks

As the offensive progressed into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's exposure was exposed. Ukraine is able to track rocket firings from enemy soil, a capacity provided through up-to-date information. From observation points, defense planes that had been scrambled to intercept incoming guided weapons flew past – sophisticated military planes provided to Ukraine by NATO members.

Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: several firings deployed against a hostile projectile. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, presumably delivered by partner states. Every launch shakes the surroundings, causing tremors. The brief panic quickly becomes resigned acknowledgment: possibly the hostile projectile won't strike its target this time, protecting urban areas from ruin and another blackout.

Persistent Threats

Following this, a heavy machine gun fired at a unmanned aircraft somewhere nearby, part of a rapid response unit – probably Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it continued its flight toward its destination.

Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv greeted the morning news: several casualties, devastation and infrastructure problems in many homes as a result of the evening attack. As typically, everyone still continued their routines – enduring hostilities. But those 24 hours illustrated Ukraine's vital need on international aid – a reliance that European nations are evidently unprepared to substitute in the near term.

Failed Diplomacy

The detailed framework from American leadership sparked intense emotion, discussion and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's largest corruption scandal in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and bilateral conferences.

Every new initiative from American administration follows the same pattern: a political offensive against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually win the battle. This pattern will, undoubtedly, persist.

Political Considerations

It is easy to blame certain parties of persistently promoting Kremlin's demands. But that does not seem to be the whole story. American leadership works based on a principle well known to international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The White House believes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to abandon the territory that it presently holds in Ukraine's southern or eastern regions.

The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, American administration does little to deter Moscow, through statements or actions, from believing that the situation will not change more in its favour in the months ahead.

Opposing Positions

Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their motivation to sign a deal that does not give them the largest achievable advantage is close to zero. There may be numerous efforts to achieve ceasefire, but they will persist as long as Russia's leadership remains supremely confident in the conclusion.

On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, slowly losing people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until circumstances change in its favour.

Existing Situation

Objectively, there are no real preconditions for a truce. Now, individual motivations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and achieve global acclaim, and Ukrainian leadership's dual difficulties – on one hand, not to alienate a key ally, and on the other, to rally Ukrainians around the country's interests against any initiative Kyiv finds unworkable, so that their focus does not move to homefront challenges. And although their objective will now be significantly challenging after current events, it remains quite doubtful that this will change their overall approach.

These two forces are driving the talks.

Assessment and Future

It took a only one week to terminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Aggressive and erratic handling of the matter by Washington, pushback by Ukraine and the other European countries, along with pacifying measures of representatives, and finally, current information leaks, all did their job.

While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should draw one fundamental conclusion: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to resist diplomatic offensives from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and demonstrate particular unwillingness to alter the situation, if they maintain solidarity and strengthen their defence capabilities at a significantly accelerated rate. If they do, no combination of diplomatic or military actions will be able to break them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capacity to counter nocturnal attacks will, for the predictable period, primarily depend on sustained allied backing.