Attempts at peace negotiations to end war between Russia and Ukraine appear to be quixotic. On the sidelines of the peace talks which so far have resulted only in exchange of Prisoners of War (PoW), Russia is buying more time, recollecting energies and striking with missiles even more forcefully. As per the latest reports, Russia has fired more than 500 aerial weapons at Ukraine overnight, in a barrage that Kyiv described as the biggest air attack so far of the three-year war. Meanwhile, Ukraine has requested for more military assistance from the US to deter Russia from attacking. Ukraine faces hard realities of a power game after surrendering nuclear capabilities and transferring nuclear weapons to Russia in return of assurance of security from the US, Britain and Russia in the Budapest Memorandum in 1994. Just like its annexation of Crimea in 2014, Russia strongly believes its violation of the international norm of respecting sovereignty and territorial integrity of another state that developed in the post-World War era is likely to eventually get legitimized by the international community through any prospective peace process. The consensus among the great powers that emerged in early 1990s to uphold the norm of sovereignty and keep Iraq off from forcible seizure of Kuwait is hardly achievable in the current scenario as the war not only represents the aggression of a UN Security Council permanent member, Russia, it pits interests of some permanent members against others as well.
Both Russia and Ukraine have taken advantages from use of more advanced technologies bringing greater automation in warfare, involvement of several external actors, obliteration of distinction between civilians, misinformation and disinformation campaigns. However, by showing an inclination to violate international norms more defiantly, Russia has used some of the stimulants more effectively than Ukraine. For instance, apart from violating the international norms against aggression, Russia, unlike Ukraine was not subject to restrictions by its suppliers of weapons to attack targets inside Ukraine whereas Western suppliers of long-range missiles and drones to Ukraine stipulated that its weapon systems could not hit targets inside the Russian territory. The restrictions were eventually lifted following several civilian casualties and military debacles suffered by Ukraine. Similarly, Russia is not a party to the 1997 Ottawa Treaty that banned the production and use of indiscriminate anti-personnel mines which led it to indiscriminately use mines against Ukrainian military personnel and civilians. Ukraine is now considering to withdraw from the treaty to deter Russia from such attacks.
Ukraine Lacks Staunch Allies
The secretive Ukrainian drone attack on June 1 this year reportedly damaged several Russian bombers parked at airbases deep inside the country either destroyed them completely or degraded more than 40 Tu-95, Tu-160 and Tu-22 M3 strategic bombers, as well as an A-50 airborne-early-warning jet. According to some estimates the losses represented roughly one-third of Russia’s long-range strike fleet and about US$7 billion in hardware. These precise, clandestinely designed devastating attacks attested to the ability of Ukraine to prevail in the war for more than three years through battlefield adaptation and adoption of innovative strategies. But to deter and retaliate to continued attacks from Russia need sustained backing from the US and European countries. Economic sanctions imposed on Russia by the US and European countries grant enough exemptions to it to sustain a war economy despite slowing down of the growth rate. The slackness in the sanction regime still allows Europe to import around $23.5 billion worth of Russian oil and natural gas providing Moscow hefty energy income and foreign currency flows. Similarly, Russian frozen assets roughly amounting to $300 billion in these countries still remain unused while these could have been channeled to boost Ukrainian military capabilities due to legal and moral confusions over the use of frozen assets.
Lack of US confidence in Ukraine’s strength and the leaders’ dillydally approach to Ukraine’s military needs sapped the country’s resilience to a certain degree. Such cynicisms were reflected in President Trump’s assertion that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had “no cards” left to play. Such pessimism was corroborated with Vice President JD Vance remark that Ukraine—and its foreign backers—never had any “pathway to victory.” The transatlantic military alliance maintained through NATO that used to be the linchpin to provision of security to allies and partners are under constant pressures from US President Donald Trump who carries a transactional worldview. He does not perceive the level and intensity of threat from Russian actions that Europe is perceiving from Russian military offensives against Ukraine. Under Trump, European security concerns are likely to be sidelined that have already pushed the European countries towards more defense spending in order to defend themselves as well as Ukraine from the Russian aggression after losing the hope of traditional leading role provided by the US.
Europe’s defense industry appears to be too fragile and scattered to shore up the military capabilities of Ukraine to confront Russia without American sustained military and economic assistance. The US can enable Ukraine with capabilities such as air defense systems and long-range precision fires that Ukraine needs but Europe currently lacks in sufficient quantities.
Ukraine has not been able to find a staunch ally to sustain its war efforts on par with Chinese support to Russian efforts. A 2024 report by Carnegie Endowment for International Peace revealed that China was responsible for roughly 90 percent of the goods that Russia needed to sustain its war effort. An internal EU report in 2025 provided the critical finding that China is responsible for approximately 80 percent of all circumventions of sanctions against Russia.
The American extended nuclear deterrence removed from larger Europe has strengthened Russia vis-a-vis Ukraine and places Moscow in a favorable position to enter peace talks from a position of strength. The nuclear deterrence provided by Britain and France against Russia is overwhelmed by the number of nuclear warheads available with Russia.
---
*Senior Lecturer, SVM Autonomous College, Jagatsinghpur, Odisha, India
Comments