Obsessed with strength

Up to six months

Ten days before the inauguration of future US President Donald Trump, there is a mounting debate about a possible end to the war in Ukraine. Trump had announced during the election campaign that he would quickly make a deal and end the war, claiming wildly in one speech that he would fix it “within 24 hours”. Trump himself is now talking about a period of possibly “six months”. His designated special envoy to Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, says he is aiming for a period of around a hundred days to achieve a “viable and sustainable” peace.[1] A trip to Kiev, originally planned by Kellogg to take place around now, has been postponed without giving reasons. It is likely to be arranged only after Trump takes office.[2] The Biden administration and the majority of European governments are doing what they can to keep Ukraine fighting and delay the end of hostilities. Their argument is that negotiations with Moscow should only start from a position of strength. This is an argument that could be effective in convincing Trump to take his time, since they know that Trump is “obsessed with strength and looking strong”, as one European government official is quoted as saying.[3]

Majorities in favour of negotiations

Just how a position of strength is to be achieved for Ukraine remains unclear. The Ukrainian armed forces recently had to relinquish Kurakhove, a town south-west of Donetsk. They could lose the strategically important city of Pokrovsk in the near future. Their attempt to regain the initiative with a new offensive into the Russian region of Kursk appears to have fizzled out. The number of deserters, already estimated at 200,000 or more at the end of last year, continues to rise.[4] According to opinion surveys, a clear majority of Ukrainians have long been in favour of moving quickly to negotiations on an end to the war instead of hoping for a military victory that will probably never be achieved.[5] The once widely heard view in Western Europe that Ukrainians should keep on fighting until Russia withdraws from all Ukrainian territory is becoming increasingly rare. According to a recent survey in seven Western European countries, only in Sweden does half the population want continued fighting, while in Germany, France, Italy and Spain significantly more people are in favour of entering peace negotiations quickly.[6] This position is now supported by 45 per cent of the population in Germany and as many as 55 per cent in Italy.

Involved in the war

A recent answer from the German government to a formal information request tabled by the Left Party (Die Linke) in the Bundestag states that the Bundeswehr now has 54 soldiers involved in the war in Ukraine. Specifically, 44 German soldiers are currently active in NATO’s new Ukraine Command. NSATU (NATO Security Assistance and Training for Ukraine), which is a facility located at the US Clay Barracks in Wiesbaden tasked with coordinating military assistance for the Ukrainian armed forces.[7] The statement added that ten German military personnel were carrying out security tasks as part of a so-called Voluntary National Contribution, but the details are not known. According to Bundestag member Sören Pellmann (Die Linke), this is a NATO programme “that establishes and supports military structures on the territory of Ukraine.” It is therefore unclear whether the ten German soldiers are operating on Ukrainian territory, and are therefore combattants in the middle of a war zone.[8] Regardless of the dangers, German politicians continue to insist that the Bundeswehr should send troops to Ukraine to secure any future ceasefire. CDU politician Roderich Kiesewetter, who is responsible for foreign and military policy, has called for this to be done “at the appropriate time with robustly equipped troops”.[9]

Huge costs of reconstruction

In a parallel debate there is increasing attention to the question of how the West should deal with a war-ravaged Ukraine when the fighting stops. It has long been clear that the necessary reconstruction will consume immense sums of money. Trump has already made it clear that he is against the use of US funds for this work. The West has made repeated calls for the confiscation of Russian central bank assets frozen in Europe, which amount to almost 260 billion euros. Interest generated from part of these assets is already being used to provide loans to support Ukraine (german-foreign-policy.com reported [10]). A complete confiscation of the capital sum could, of course, become a dangerous precedent for Europe. For instance, countries that have filed claims against Germany resulting from its colonial or Nazi crimes could, could take legal steps to confiscate German assets abroad. This prospect has so far made Berlin shy away from such a money grab.

‘China must not play a role’

Alternatively, it would be conceivable to involve economically strong countries such as China in the reconstruction of Ukraine. However, German politicians are categorically opposed to this. “Europe should prevent China from playing any role in the reconstruction of Ukraine,” exclaims, for example, CDU politician Kiesewetter. The People's Republic has, he argues, “a very clear interest in gaining influence in Ukraine”, something that must be prevented.[11] Fellow hawk, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP), who chairs the Subommittee on Security and Defence in the European Parliament, agrees, “China must definitely not play a role in the reconstruction of Ukraine. On the contrary, it is time to end the sell-out of European infrastructure.”[12] However, the EU is already heavily burdened by its support for the war in Ukraine and would then have to bear most of the huge costs of reconstruction alone.

Hatred of the West

Jan Jireš, Director General of the defence policy and strategy section of the Czech Republic’s defence ministry, recently raised another aspect of a ceasefire that has so far been largely ignored in Germany. Jireš recalled that Western states had always claimed they would give whatever it takes for Ukraine to win. In reality, military support for Kiev has never been as limitless as the West has suggested. The gap between rhetorical support and actual support is becoming more and more apparant to sections of the Ukrainian society, especially now that the prospect of military defeat looms large. The already growing anger towards the West will, claims Jireš, turn to hatred after a ceasefire that will not, in his view, amount to peace.[13]

[1] Henry Foy, Max Seddon, Amy Kazmin: Donald Trump pushes back Ukraine war deadline in sign of support for Kyiv. ft.com 09.01.2025.

[2] Vasilisa Stepanenko: Trump’s Ukraine envoy postpones planned trip to Kyiv, top Ukrainian diplomat says. apnews.com 08.01.2025.

[3] Henry Foy, Max Seddon, Amy Kazmin: Donald Trump pushes back Ukraine war deadline in sign of support for Kyiv. ft.com 09.01.2025.

[4], [5] See also: Bis zum allerletzten Ukrainer.

[6] Jon Henley, Luke Harding: Support for Ukraine ‘until it wins’ falls sharply in western Europe, poll finds. theguardian.com 26.12.2024.

[7] See: On Europe’s shoulders.

[8] Raphael Schmeller: Bundesregierung bestätigt: 54 Bundeswehrsoldaten im Rahmen der Nato für Ukraine tätig. berliner-zeitung.de 07.01.2025.

[9] Lucas Wiegelmann: Deutsche Truppen in der Ukraine? Für CDU-Mann Kiesewetter ist das Plicht. schwaebische.de 03.01.2025.

[10] See also: Kursk and the consequences.

[11], [12] Daniel Friedrich Sturm: Deutsche Außenpolitiker warnen: „China darf beim Aufbau der Ukraine keine Rolle spielen“. tagesspiegel.de 02.01.2025.

[13] Stephan Löwenstein: „Ukrainer werden den Westen hassen“. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 03.01.2025.