The US and Germany’s strategy on Ukraine is failing – Financial Times

The current capabilities of Kyiv in its struggle against Russia, no matter how many countries support Ukraine, primarily hinge on two states: the United States and Germany.

This perspective is outlined by the Financial Times.

It is these countries that have imposed a strategy with clear boundaries, built on three principles: NATO aids Ukraine but refrains from deploying troops; it supports the country as much as needed but not using all possible means; it undertakes security commitments but doesn’t guarantee membership.

The level of assistance provided by the US and Germany to Ukraine is impressive. However, the issue lies in the fact that the strategy of Washington and Berlin isn’t yielding success for Ukraine. Moreover, the capabilities of politicians are constrained by the rise of far-right forces in the West and conflicts such as the one between Israel and Hamas.

It’s unsurprising that supporters of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine have become more active. They propose establishing a ceasefire line, allowing Eastern Ukraine to align with Russia, and arming the remaining territories under Ukraine’s control, threatening the Kremlin with the potential inclusion of “Ukraine’s remnants” into NATO. However, Financial Times sees a drawback in this plan, highlighting a lack of understanding that Russia, holding significant untapped potential, intends to negotiate only on its own terms. Moreover, Russia’s “special operation” extends beyond Ukraine—it has transformed into an “eternal war” against the West.

Against this backdrop, the publication deems it prudent to shift the burden from the US to where it rightly belongs: Europe. Currently, Europe holds the potential to address one of the most serious security challenges to the alliance since World War II, but there’s still a risk of failure looming over it.