The EU’s deeds as much as Putin’s words will ensure the war in Ukraine continues | Rajan Menon
The European Union has approved a €90 billion loan to keep Ukraine financially afloat, while Vladimir Putin's steadfast claims over occupied regions suggest the war will continue. The article examines the geopolitical tug‑of‑war between EU support, US‑Russia dynamics, and the prospects for a negoti…
On 19 December, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered his customary year‑end press briefing, reiterating that Russia’s “special military operation” will not abandon its original objectives: full control of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson. The message, unaccompanied by any indication of a strategic shift, underscores why the conflict in Ukraine is likely to persist well into the next year.
Putin’s unwavering territorial claims
Four years after the invasion began, Russian forces have only fully occupied Luhansk, despite earlier annexation moves that incorporated the four regions into the Russian Federation through a State Duma vote. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov have repeatedly echoed Moscow’s insistence that these territories belong to Russia, reinforcing a narrative that dates back to Putin’s claim that Ukrainians and Russians are “one people.”
The Kremlin’s stance is rooted in a historical grievance: the post‑Soviet split that left a large Russian‑speaking population on the Ukrainian side of the border. Putin repeatedly argues that the 1991 separation was a “tragedy” and that eastern and southern Ukraine rightfully belong to Russia. This rhetoric, combined with the legal annexation attempts, leaves little room for diplomatic compromise unless Moscow’s core demands are met.
U.S. political calculations and Trump’s role
Former President Donald Trump has positioned himself as a potential broker, praising Putin’s “genius” and urging Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to cede parts of Donetsk in exchange for security guarantees and a neutral status. Zelenskyy has signaled willingness to abandon NATO membership aspirations and adopt neutrality, but only if robust Western guarantees are provided. Even with these concessions, analysts argue that Putin would not be placated, as his objectives extend beyond mere territorial adjustments.
Trump’s approach aligns with his broader foreign‑policy outlook, which downplays Europe’s strategic importance and seeks direct U.S.–Russia economic cooperation. While he has praised Putin’s willingness to negotiate, he has not delivered a concrete deal that satisfies Russian demands, leaving the war’s trajectory unchanged.
EU’s €90 billion lifeline for Kyiv
In a decisive move, the European Union approved a €90 billion, two‑year loan to Ukraine. The financing is structured so that repayment is contingent on Russia paying reparations, effectively making it a grant unless Moscow fulfills that condition. This decision came after a failed attempt to use interest from €210 billion of frozen Russian assets, which was blocked by dissenting member states.
The loan demonstrates that a bloc of 27 sovereign nations can coordinate substantial financial support despite internal disagreements. It also signals Europe’s willingness to act independently of the United States, especially after Trump’s suspension of direct military aid to Kyiv in March 2024 and his rhetoric that America has “no stake” in the conflict.
Implications for the war’s duration
With the EU’s funding, Ukraine’s government and armed forces are less likely to face a financial collapse, allowing continued resistance against a numerically superior Russian military. However, Russia’s economy, though strained, remains functional, and its armed forces have suffered heavy losses in personnel and equipment.
The combination of Putin’s steadfast claims and the EU’s financial commitment suggests a protracted stalemate. Unless a breakthrough occurs—either through a dramatic shift in Russian policy on the annexed territories or a new diplomatic framework that satisfies both Moscow and Kyiv—the conflict is set to extend into 2025.
What comes next?
Future developments hinge on several variables: the willingness of NATO members to provide additional military aid, the United States’ diplomatic posture under the current administration, and any internal pressures within Russia that could force a reconsideration of its objectives. Meanwhile, the EU’s loan package may serve as a template for further financial mechanisms aimed at sustaining Ukraine’s defense and reconstruction efforts.
For now, the war’s trajectory appears locked in a pattern where Putin’s rhetoric fuels continued aggression, while European financial support prevents Kyiv from succumbing to economic exhaustion. The outcome will likely be decided on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, with both sides aware that any compromise will require significant concessions.
Why it matters
The EU’s unprecedented loan keeps Ukraine fighting while Putin’s unyielding claims ensure the war’s continuation, shaping Europe’s security landscape for years to come.
Key points
- EU approves a €90 bn loan to Ukraine with repayment tied to Russian reparations
- Putin reaffirms Russia’s goal to fully control Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson
- Trump’s attempts at a US‑Russia deal have not produced a viable peace plan
- Russia’s economy is strained but not collapsing, while its military suffers heavy losses
- European financial support now operates increasingly independent of U.S. aid
Frequently asked questions
What is the purpose of the EU’s €90 bn loan to Ukraine?
The loan is intended to fund Ukraine’s government and military for two years, with repayment only if Russia pays reparations, effectively acting as a grant unless Moscow fulfills that condition.
Has Putin indicated any willingness to change his war objectives?
No. In his December press conference, Putin reiterated that Russia will continue to pursue full control of the four occupied regions, showing no sign of compromise.
How does Trump’s stance affect the conflict?
Trump has advocated for a negotiated settlement that would pressure Zelenskyy to cede territory, but he has not delivered a concrete agreement that satisfies Russian demands, leaving the war’s dynamics largely unchanged.
Why did the EU abandon the plan to use interest from frozen Russian assets?
Member states were divided, with some outright opposing the use of frozen asset interest and others expressing reservations, leading the EU to pursue a direct loan instead.
