It is no coincidence that a tsunami of pro-Ukrainian propaganda, including an op-ed by leading European pro-NATO ambassadors who advocate pursuing the war until the last Ukrainian, has hit our mainstream media just prior to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to India. For these Europeans evidently, security and sovereignty are paramount for all countries other than Russia; they raise no objection to the exercise of the Monroe doctrine when it comes to the USA.
Meanwhile, the Ukraine corruption investigation is proceeding in a manner which suggests a campaign aimed at political outcomes representing a scandal that is a blow to Ukrainian President Zelenskyy who is emerging as a lame duck because he cannot reject Washington’s mediation since it drastically limits his scope for defiance. The prospect for a US President Trump-inspired peace is more realistic now because a scapegoat has emerged for Ukraine’s looming defeat, namely Zelenskyy himself. Significantly, the negotiation process for peace has been taking place energetically for weeks between the Europeans led by UK, France and Germany, with the US, rather than with Russia, while Moscow repeats that it has not yet been shown any plan.
The talks initiated by Trump earlier this year did not progress because nobody wished to be responsible for an outcome that contrasted with the expectations Western war zealots had promoted, namely, that Russia could be coerced into accepting Western diktats. That presumption underpinned Western policy throughout the conflict, and was why Kyiv refused an end to the war in April 2022 on terms that it can only dream about today. Ukraine would have retained its formal sovereignty over the Donbas region, only a part of which would have achieved Russian-influenced autonomy and Ukraine would have lost the Crimean Peninsula, which in any case Russia occupied and annexed in 2014. The opportunity in 2022 having been rejected, NATO members supplied Ukraine military support and funding along with nineteen packages of economic sanctions against Moscow but have failed to stop the advances by the Russian army, which has grown stronger and more technologically advanced than it was at the start of the conflict. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s population has dropped from 50 million at independence to about 31 million in territory controlled by Kyiv as of early 2025. The Kiev government has failed to motivate or mobilise the country; in fact, the opposite. Ukraine is struggling with draft dodging, territorial and human losses; 255,000 cases of unauthorised absence and more than 56,000 for desertion since 2022. In the first 10 months of 2025 alone, 162,500 AWOL cases and 21,600 desertion cases have been registered. Desertion from the army last October was the highest monthly figure so far.
Ukraine could run out of Western funding by April 2026, and its close allies Poland and Germany have indicated they are unwilling to keep subsidising the large numbers of Ukrainian refugees they are currently hosting. NATO decided to support Ukraine with weapons and training while avoiding steps that could trigger any direct NATO-Russia war, which remains its position, and Ukraine is effectively fighting Russia alone even as the Kremlin demands major territorial concessions and withdrawal of Ukrainian forces. Without this and other preconditions, Russia says it will not halt its advance. Ukraine, for its part, maintains that it will not surrender territory. This year, Ukraine abandoned its entirely unrealistic demands for a full Russian withdrawal and reparations in favour of a comprehensive ceasefire along the current front lines though this still reflects the absence of any plan that could improve Ukraine’s negotiating position.
Trump has no leverage here; he can threaten weaker states, but he exercises no influence over Putin. Presently the Ukrainian army is under-supplied. USA has all but halted arms deliveries to Ukraine; military assistance has dwindled to a trickle, consisting mostly of supplies approved by USA under Joe Biden and Europe has not filled the gap. The European Union’s defence industry and joint-procurement schemes have produced promises but few results and while a few billion euros have been formally committed, far less has been delivered. Member states prefer to rearm themselves first and Ukraine later, although their own programmes are moving slowly.
The EU is divided between governments willing to take greater risks to support Kyiv and others that fear provoking Russia or depleting their own budgets. Brussels is now pushing for a plan to use frozen Russian assets to back a loan of up to $162bn for Ukraine, which could support Kyiv’s budget and defence spending over the next two years. Ukraine will continue launching precision drone strikes on Russian oil infrastructure in the hope of grinding down the Kremlin’s economy and waiting for Putin to concede, but this is an illusion. A radical change in approach is needed immediately, before Ukraine’s strategic options narrow further. Ukraine faces a vast budget deficit and public debt that is likely to exceed 100 per cent of GDP. Europe has failed to assemble the necessary funds, while economic growth across the continent remains weak.
Any significant increase in support to Ukraine would require political courage at a time when voters are acutely sensitive to the recent surge in inflation. Being blamed for an Ukraine defeat is no big risk for Trump, who has for long dismissed this conflict as ‘Biden’s war’, accusing his predecessor of having started it. But it is much harder for European NATO leaders and Zelenskyy to accept it, given how invested they have been in the belief that Russia could be defeated on the battlefield and the invasion turned back. The war and foreign funding have helped Zelenskyy to survive thus far. The crucial question now is whether Trump is losing patience with the negotiation process and proposes to bear down on Zelenskyy to accept US terms for an agreement with Russia. If so, Zelenskyy faces a Hobson’s choice; between survival though accepting US terms for a peace, or a strategic and military collapse.
(The writer is India’s former foreign secretary)