Quick Take
What is the single most remarkable fact about Ukraine on this third anniversary of Russia’s invasion?
In one line: that it survived.
Putin’s Russian armies invaded with a plan to erase Ukraine from the map. Most informed observers including CIA, MI 6 and Mossad expected Putin to seize Kiev in the first two weeks. The US and others did not send arms for the first month since they expected they would be captured by invading Russians.
What everyone underestimated was the most difficult factor to assess in analyzing war: the will to fight. Thanks to the remarkable courage, resilience, and determination of President Zelensky and so many of his Ukrainian colleagues who have been willing to fight and kill and die for their country, Ukraine still exists.
While we salute and honor their bravery, realism requires that we recognize that each month the current war continues down its current path, Ukraine will be worse off than it was the month before. Every month of war brings Russian seizure of additional Ukrainian territory, more dead Ukrainians warriors and civilians, more destruction of Ukraine’s apartments, energy system, and economy, more Ukrainians leaving the country.
It is past time for this war to end.
The war in Ukraine, now in its fourth year, remains one of the most pressing issues of international security today, with long-ranging strategic consequences.
On the face of it, President Trump’s line on Ukraine is a significant departure from his predecessor’s. Amid flux, backroom dealings, and provocative rhetoric, it is difficult to see the full scope of Trump’s intended approach to ending the war in Ukraine. But it is equally difficult to see how a patchwork of hastily concluded transactional agreements can solve a strategic problem and establish durable peace in Europe. In that, Trump’s Ukraine policy is not so different from the previous US administrations: it lacks a long-term Ukraine strategy.
Garry Kasparov, a chess grandmaster and long-time political opponent of Russian president Putin, said that you don’t play chess one move at a time, you play the whole game. Russia’s game is to destroy Ukraine as an independent state and undermine the West. Ukraine’s game is to survive as an independent state and integrate with the West.
What is America’s game?
The past two weeks effectively confirmed Ukraine’s fears of American abandonment. Ukraine will now have to cope with fighting the war with limited American help and deciding how to handle whatever peace proposals the Trump and Putin teams suggest. There is still a sliver of hope that with European support and its own tenacity, Ukraine will be able to push the talks toward an outcome that ends the fighting with some serious security guarantees for Ukraine to reduce the odds of a later re-invasion.
These weeks have shaken American allies’ confidence that the United States would really be there for them if they needed it, and increased the risk that adversaries will see American commitments as a bluff. Hence, the risk of war against American allies and the risk that American allies may pursue nuclear weapons to ensure their security have both increased.
Better U.S.-Russian relations, however, may create opportunities for new accords on risk reduction and on nuclear restraint that would reduce threats to US and world security. But those are only really plausible if an end to the war in Ukraine can be reached that does not leave Ukraine naked to further Russian aggression, and in the context of new actions to ensure that American allies are effectively defended.
Hearing firsthand from former foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba this week deepened my understanding of the consequences of the Trump administration’s sharp policy shift on Ukraine. The reversal not only undermines international support for Ukraine but also signals weakness that Putin may exploit.
Even if Putin agrees to a temporary ceasefire to accommodate Trump, it will be a tactical move rather than a genuine step toward peace.
In that scenario, the need for sustained Western support—particularly in mobilizing investment for reconstruction—will become even more urgent. Strengthening Ukraine’s economy is critical to reinforcing its sovereignty, ensuring it is not solely reliant on military aid. Mobilizing governments and multilateral institutions to provide concessionary financing will be essential to reduce risks for private investors, and make long-term economic development more viable. Beyond large-scale infrastructure projects, targeted support for small businesses will be crucial in stabilizing the economy.
During this week, I’ve been noticing how the Chinese position has changed – and in some ways become more cautious – during the rapid-fire negotiations. It was fascinating to see foreign minister Wang Yi declare that he agreed with a new US-Russia “consensus” – but also that “the parties concerned” needed to find an answer agreeable to all.
Could that be a way of pointing out that Ukraine needs to be at the table sooner rather than later? Beijing would never say that out loud.
But China has no interest in a solution that just leads to more instability and this calibrated from Wang Yi might be part of a warning on that front.
Recent developments in the war in Ukraine have made it increasingly clear that its course will be dictated not by rhetoric, but by the balance of military capabilities and political will—both within Ukraine and among its allies.
The shifting U.S. political landscape adds volatility, making long-term Western support less assured than before. Meanwhile, Russia bets on strategic patience, internal fractures among Ukraine’s allies, and long-term war fatigue and political divisions.
Any negotiated outcome must avoid setting a precedent where territorial aggression is rewarded, as that would have lasting consequences far beyond Ukraine. For any meaningful negotiation and settlement, it is also crucial that Ukraine retains agency in shaping its own fate.
The road ahead remains uncertain, but Ukraine’s resilience—and the choices of its European allies—will be decisive in determining the war’s trajectory and its broader geopolitical consequences in the coming months.