Ukraine: Now What?

March 3, 2025

The lighting was perfect, and the camera was rolling when Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky walked into the Oval Office on February 28 to sign a sweeping minerals deal. Lunch had been prepared to celebrate the signing. Both heads of state are seasoned television performers in their past and previous lives, and the “unwritten” script was that Zelensky would fawn and praise President Donald Trump for his efforts to stop the war. Instead, Zelensky raised the thorny issue that security guarantees needed to be in the deal, and the meeting suddenly went sideways. Vice President J.D. Vance accused Zelensky of being ungrateful, and Trump told him he had no bargaining position by saying, “You don’t have the cards.” The two verbally pummeled him, and Trump asked Zelensky to leave, noting to the camera, “This is going to be great television — I will say that,” and departed for Mar-A-Lago. The press speculated whether Zelensky was ambushed or simply didn’t take advice as to how to handle the volatile Trump. But it was obvious that Trump and Vance took sadistic delight in abusing him, and that, whatever the cause, it was a continuation of Trump’s hit series, “The Apprentice”. But this time, the leader of Ukraine - and Europe itself - was “fired”.

Bringing up the issue of security guarantees was hardly impertinent, given Russia’s serial invasions and massacre of Ukrainians. As one U.S. general put it: “Even the cleaning ladies in Kyiv know firsthand that Russia does not honor a ceasefire unless there are troops enforcing it”. To Zelensky, his aides, and Ukrainians worldwide, it is also a no-brainer. They know that the peace deal being considered by Trump — a cease-fire without any American security guarantees — would be tantamount to a surrender, considering Putin’s record of violations and invasions in 2014 and 2022.

The Kyiv Independent aptly described the significance: “Let this sink in: The president of a battered Ukraine, an ally of the U.S., became the first world leader in history to be kicked out of the White House. Not a dictator, not a disgraced politician — the president of Ukraine, a country suffering from the worst invasion in the 21st century. The country that the U.S. administration swore to bring peace to. After the meeting, Trump claimed that Zelensky didn’t want peace. That’s a dangerous lie.”

Cast off by Trump, Ukraine faces the possible cutoff in vital American military assistance, leaving Ukraine isolated and Russia emboldened. Trump has also neutered NATO and Europe’s defense, which is why the day after this leader-bashing took place, Britain and France sprung to action to fill the “security guarantee” vacuum that Ukraine needs if the US and Russia agree to a ceasefire. (Fortunately, Trump National Security Advisor Mike Waltz said the US would support such an effort without direct involvement.)

Thus, on March 2, the British Prime Minister, Keith Starmer, announced, "We've now agreed that the UK along with France and possibly one of two others will work on a plan to stop the fighting and we’ll discuss that plan with the United States.” A "coalition of the willing" would be formed — led by London and Paris — to provide security guarantees. “We have to bridge this. We have to find a way to work together because, in the end, we've had three years of bloody conflict. Now, we need to get to that lasting peace."

It's also obvious that Europeans must build a continental armed force because the Americans cannot be counted on. To do so, they must stop refusing to confiscate the roughly $300 billion of Russian central bank assets frozen in European banks after the 2022 invasion. Delays have been due to banking concerns that confiscation will negatively impact the Euro, which many sketchy players use to hide their ill-gotten or untaxed gains offshore. However, concerns are overstated, and those funds are now essential to keep Russia at bay, especially if the US negotiates a ceasefire to allow Russia to retool and mobilize. Putin’s next targets are the former Soviet satellite countries in Europe.

The current acrimony raises questions about the war and whether Trump will continue to help Ukraine defend itself. The following are expert opinions on the situation and the ramifications of Trump’s possible withdrawal of support.

Battlefield status

The Center for Strategic & International Studies (CIS) says the war is a stalemate. Ukraine’s defenses on the east front are holding, and it retains control of Russia’s Kursk region. By 2024, Russia had gained territory the size of Rhode Island at a cost of 420,000 casualties. Moscow’s combat losses have increased dramatically and are expected to hit one million in 2025, the CIS estimates. This would be disastrous for Putin, who does not want to have to call for further mobilization.

Can Ukraine survive without US military support?

The CIS does not believe that Ukraine will lose the war without future American military aid. “The bad news is that U.S. funding for military aid to Ukraine is now depleted. The good news is that a steady stream of American equipment will continue to flow due to previous commitments – if Trump allows it. More will come from the Europeans, who have committed around $40 billion that has not yet been delivered.”

Ukraine’s existing army totals 900,000 combat soldiers (the biggest in Europe) and has reinvented warfare with drones and other technologies that have decimated Russian efforts. It has devastated Russia’s navy with unmanned drones and become a formidable foe in the field.

Military equipment issues

“The bad news is that the Europeans are already supplying as much as they can, given the deteriorated state of their defense industry.” In the worst case, the United States could cut off equipment shipments. Still, the CIS said that would not be disastrous due to what Ukraine receives from the Europeans, other global sources, and its own industry, which will keep its forces in the field but with declining capabilities. “Russian attacks will gain more and more territory; at some point, Ukrainian lines will break. Ukraine will have to accept an unfavorable, even draconian peace.”

“On the positive side, the United States is projected to deliver substantially more equipment in 2025 than in 2024, barring a Trump administration interruption, with monthly deliveries rising from $500 million to $920 million. These deliveries, combined with increasing European production and expanding domestic production, will strengthen Ukraine’s firepower across the board and replace the high reported attrition,” wrote the CIS. Then, on March 2, the Europeans convened a meeting, and Prime Minister Starmer announced a £1.6bn missile deal for Ukraine. An expeditionary force will be formed with air cover if a cease-fire is signed.

Euro Forward

The promising, newly elected leader of Germany, Freidrich Merz, favors building a European army and upgrading defense across the continent. However, until that happens, the CIS believes “prospects are bleak.” The status quo from US and Euro aid means the front lines will remain stabilized, Russian attacks will be repelled, and, at best, Ukraine could buy time for a more reasonably negotiated settlement once Russian casualties surpass the 1 million mark in June. That may make Putin’s demands more reasonable.

Trump’s explosive behavior toward Zelensky was not justified. He foolishly promised to end the war within 24 hours during his election campaign, then revised that to 100 days. To meet his own nonsensical deadline, he’s pushing the process. He has granted Putin concessions he shouldn’t have given up, such as rejecting NATO membership for Ukraine, and tried to pressure Ukraine to sign a ceasefire deal without guarantees that Putin will use to replenish his arsenal and army.

Fortunately, Europeans and Ukrainians remain resolved. But as one Ukrainian drone operator told a newspaper, “I saw attempts to humiliate and mock the president of a country that has been in blood for three years. This is immoral behavior.”