The latest round of US-brokered talks between Russia and Ukraine concluded without a significant breakthrough. While the parties reached near-consensus over a ceasefire monitoring mechanism, they remain deadlocked over the key issue of territory. Kyiv maintains that a comprehensive ceasefire must precede any peace agreement or elections. Meanwhile, Moscow insists that Ukraine must cede the entire Donbas region – including territories Russia has failed to secure militarily – before fighting can stop.
Moscow has managed to convince US President Trump’s team that it is engaging in peace talks ‘in good faith’ and that ceding Ukrainian-held territory is the only path to a lasting peace. This has added pressure on Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy to finalize a peace settlement and establish a timeline for national elections by the summer. Increasingly aware of Ukraine’s importance to European security, Europe has stepped up to help Kyiv withstand US pressure for a quick deal – which would only embolden the Kremlin.
Ukraine’s red lines
Notwithstanding US diplomatic pressure, Zelenskyy’s main constraint is the risk of a domestic backlash against terms perceived as a betrayal of the nation’s wartime sacrifices. Zelenskyy has warned that he cannot accept territorial concessions because the Ukrainian people would ‘never forgive this’. According to a January 2026 survey, 54 per cent of Ukrainians categorically reject the idea of Ukraine withdrawing its troops from parts of Donbas it still controls and transferring these to Russia in exchange for Western security guarantees. Cementing Russian control over Donbas would leave Ukrainians vulnerable to further Russian attacks. Any changes to Ukrainian territory would also require a nationwide referendum, which must be approved by parliament. Not only would a referendum face severe security and legal challenges but any conditions that would undermine Ukrainian sovereignty would likely be rejected.
In terms of pressure to hold elections, Ukraine is currently under martial law and thus constitutionally barred from holding elections. There are other concerns too. Without a ceasefire, polling stations would become targets for Russian missile strikes. A quarter of the country’s population are internally displaced or have fled the country, meaning voter registration data is largely outdated. Millions are still serving in the military or living under occupation and would be unable to cast ballots or run for office. There would also be the threat of destabilizing Russian influence campaigns during the election. A December 2025 survey showed that 59 per cent of Ukrainians oppose holding elections before fighting ends and a peace deal is reached.
Europeans are ‘Trump-proofing’ support for Ukraine
As the US scales back its military support for Ukraine and pushes for a quick deal, European governments have stepped up to ensure Ukraine is able to defend itself and negotiate from a position of strength. Europe has effectively replaced the US as Ukraine’s main donor. EU military aid rose by 67 per cent in 2025 and the EU has approved a €90 billion loan to Ukraine for budgetary and military support in 2026–27.
Increased European burden-sharing has provided Kyiv with a defensive buffer. The responsibility for funding new advanced equipment (like Patriot air defence systems) has shifted from the US to European NATO allies through the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL). Meanwhile, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has indicated that the alliance could secure an additional $15 billion in 2026 (on top of the $5 billion allocated in 2025) to sustain Ukraine’s military needs. With the US stepping back from the Ukraine Defence Contact Group (the ‘Ramstein format’), the UK and Germany assumed co-leadership to ensure the continued coordination of weapons deliveries.
European leaders are also working to ensure Kyiv is not coerced into a bad deal. The ‘coalition of the willing’ – led by France, the UK and Poland – has proposed security guarantees that include potential European troop deployments to enforce any future ceasefire. Critics fear that post-ceasefire deployments create an incentive for Russia to prolong the conflict. But this commitment sends an important signal that Ukraine is now an inextricable part of Europe’s future security architecture – and boosts Zelenskyy’s leverage.
An even stronger signal is Ukraine’s integration into Europe’s defence industrial base. The EU’s Security Action for Europe (SAFE) defence fund offers member states up to €150 billion in loans for long-term rearmament and allows Ukraine to participate in joint procurement. This mechanism will reduce Europe’s reliance on US supply chains, scale up domestic arms production, and enhance interoperability. There are other innovative schemes too. Countries like Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway are funding weapons production inside Ukraine through the so-called ‘Danish model’. Meanwhile, major European firms like Rheinmetall (Germany) and BAE Systems (UK) have established production hubs inside Ukraine under the ‘Build in Ukraine’ initiative.
There is also increasing cooperation on drone production as Europe aims to bolster its defences against Russia’s sub-threshold operations. European defence giants have high-quality tech but suffer from slow production cycles and high costs. Ukraine, meanwhile, is a world leader in producing cheap and effective drones capable of destroying multimillion-dollar assets. Ukraine’s defence sector has developed a direct feedback loop between frontline units and producers, adapting technology to battlefield realities in real time. The UK–Ukraine Project Octopus leverages Ukrainian battlefield innovation and British industrial capacity to mass-produce autonomous interceptors that cost less than 10 per cent to produce than the Russian strike drones they are designed to destroy. There is also a new joint venture to mass-produce Ukrainian-designed drones in Germany.
What else can Europe do?
Europe is wielding its financial, diplomatic and industrial leverage to support Ukraine, but significant challenges remain.
One is continued European hesitation to repurpose frozen Russian assets to help Ukraine. Europe’s seizure of these funds would send the message that Moscow will be held liable for war damages without burdening European taxpayers. Even if the rift in the transatlantic alliance deepens, this move would secure funding for Ukraine’s long-term defence and recovery.