October 2023 was rich in foreign policy events and geopolitical shifts. Lack of consensus in the USA about further support to Ukraine, election of a pro-Russian government in Slovakia, unbending pro-Kremlin policy in Hungary, and intensified hostilities in the Middle East may affect the agenda in the Russia-Ukraine war.

At the same time, military support to Ukraine remains unchanged. Today, it predominantly focuses on the reinforcement of air defense, with account for threats to Ukraine’s energy sector.

Ukraine is trying to reach a fair end to the war by promoting our own “peace formula”.

Russia does not show any willingness to stop military invasion but continues to seize Ukrainian lands. Russia targeted their foreign effort to reduce support to Ukraine and search for new allies. Kremlin puts a stake on the protracted war, global instability, and fatigue of the West from Ukraine. All of it has to send a signal for more decisive action from international community to stop the key source of global destabilization.

Ukraine preparing for the “worst ever winter in history” and scaling its own “peace formula”

In October, Ukraine continued to prepare for possible missile strikes at energy infrastructure. Kyiv is certain that Russia who last year attacked about 70 major energy facilities and caused damage for almost USD 9 bln, will make another attempt to destroy Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. This position is shared by the EU and NATO. Thus, the NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, believes that Putin is preparing to use winter as weapons, again. He wants to target the energy system and the gas infrastructure of Ukraine. according to Ukrainian and British intelligence, Russians are trying to accumulate the resources for that: Moscow has not been using missiles for attacks for some time now, to target Ukrainian civilian and military infrastructure, but they mostly use drones. However, according to estimates the Defence Express, from May to September, 2023, Russia launched almost 600 cruise missiles at Ukraine.

In order to prepare for the “worst ever winter,” Ukraine and partners reinforce energy infrastructure and air defense. According to The Economist, within the first component Ukraine produced and ordered 100 high voltage transformers to replace the destroyed units. Most of them are stored in Poland and Romania. In parallel, UK are training Ukrainian engineers to protect the energy system. Azerbaijan, Japan, Germany, USA, and EU provided to Ukraine either equipment (transformers, solar panels, etc.) or financial assistance for at least USD 650 mln to restore the energy infrastructure.

Moreover, Ukrainian private energy company DTEK anticipates this winter to be more difficult than last year because of more intense shelling, thus investing the unprecedented UAH 20 bln into the winterization for 2023/24. The investment was made into the repairs of TTPs, extraction of coal, oil, and gas. In addition, because of the last year’s shelling, Ukrainian energy system has lower backup capacity. That is why energy sector also expects to rely on the reinforced air defense.

The reinforcement of air defense was made a key priority, among others, during the recent meeting of the Ukraine Defense Group (Ramstein format) on October, 11, in Brussels. Following the meeting, Ukraine will receive additional air defense systems Patriot and IRIS-T from Germany, and 6 Hawk systems from Spain. In addition, it was reported that Ukraine will be able to rent air defense systems for winter season from several countries. In total, following the recent Ramstein, our country will be allocated with USD 500 mln worth military assistance. The packages include 155 mm and 105 mm artillery shells, high precision aircraft munition, anti-drone systems, armored vehicles, small arms, etc.

In October, Ukraine also received from the USA the ATACMS missiles designed for the range of up to 160 km. Shortly after, the Ukrainian Army struck the airfields in the occupied cities of Berdyansk and Luhansk, where they hit 9 russian helicopters, the air defense system, and runways. Besides, Ukraine made and agreement with Romania about the fast track training program of Ukrainian pilots for F-16.

Another significant process is to promote Ukrainian Peace Formula. Thus, on October, 28–29, a meeting took place on Malta among foreign policy and national security advisers about the implementation of Ukraine-suggested plan to end the war and establish lasting peace. It was the third meeting following the encounters in Copenhagen (Denmark) and Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) earlier this year. In general, the event was attended by diplomats from 66 countries, which is ab. 30% more than during the previous meeting in Jeddah. According to President Volodymyr Zelensky, it shows that the Ukrainian Peace Formula is going global as the meeting had representatives from all continents, including Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Interestingly enough, but Armenia joined the meeting for the first time, as they got disillusioned about Russia as an ally. Therefore, they are trying to shift the focus of their foreign policy towards the West.

Malta meeting participants were presented the developments on 5 key positions. When implemented, they will contribute to the establishment of sustainable, just, and comprehensive peace. They talked about nuclear and radiation security, food security, energy security, the release of all captured and deported persons, the restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity and global order.

For example, to restore territorial integrity of Ukraine, they suggested the following:

to reform the UN Security Council and restrict the veto power for its permanent members;

to enhance the role of the International Criminal Court and recognize its jurisdiction and decisions;

to create an early prevention system about actions compromising sovereignty and territorial integrity of states.

Russia used HAMAS attack on Israel to discredit Ukraine. Slovakia and Hungary play along the aggressor.

Early last month, the HAMAS Palestinian group guerrillas orchestrated a massive attack against Israel that appalled the world with its cruelty. At the same time, in line with their regular line, Kremlin tried to benefit from the conflict. Thus, in the first conversation with the Israeli Prime Minister after the guerilla attack, Vladimir Putin said that the RF is allegedly taking steps to “facilitate in normalizing the situation and prevent any further escalation between Israel and HAMAS fighters.” Regardless, Russia later tried to promote a resolution in the UN Security Council that ignores HAMAS terrorism, and also suggested amendments to other resolutions. At the same time, russia’s permanent representative in the Council, Vasily Nebenzya, told that the conflict in Israel is beneficial for the USA and their defense industry.

In addition, Russia accused Ukraine of the fact that Western weapons land in the hands of HAMAS fighters. To confirm that, Kremlin transferred to the terrorists the weapons seized in Ukraine, and then shared fake allegations for the allegedly regular sales of western weapons to terrorists. They claimed that because the Ukrainian authorities are corrupt, military assistance is spreading around the world and gets into black markets.

The war in Israel was used by Russia as another pretext to accuse official Washington of neglecting conflicts in the Middle east with the focus shifted to Ukraine.

Another highly discussed topic of last month was the continued assistance to Ukraine from the USA. Thus, on October, 20, Joe Biden addressed the Congress with a request for almost USD 105 bln to finance the assistance to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and security of U.S. borders. At the same time, a big share of the budget (over USD 61 bln) was planned for the assistance to our country.

A day before, the U.S. President addressed the nation and called on the Congress to show unity in the matter of assisting Ukraine, and called this moment a turning point, a “battle between global democracies and autocracies.” He also reiterated that the money spent is the “smart investment that will bring dividends to U.S. security for many generations to come.”

Unfortunately, despite the huge effort of the White House, the assistance package proposed by Biden has not been adopted yet. Moreover, there is no understanding about when it could possibly be adopted, and whether it would be adopted at all. On the one hand, the U.S. political environment lacks sufficient agreement about the combination of assistance packages for Ukraine and Israel. On the other hand, USA has not adopted the final budget. At the same time, the possibility of the shutdown is growing every day. It will directly affect support to Ukraine. However, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, Dmytro Kuleba, is rather optimistic about the continued support to our state.

Nevertheless, it looks like there is one less partner state willing to provide weapons to Ukraine. Thus, in the end of October, Slovakia adopted a new composition of the government led by the Smer-SD party leader, Robert Fico. The new Prime Minister, the same as many members of his Cabinet, is known for some anti-Ukrainian statements in the past. Upon his coming to power, he predictably said that the “new Slovakian government would not support Ukraine in the military needs, and will rather focus on humanitarian assistance.”

Slovakian government leader also said he was not going to vote in the EU for “any sanctions” against Russia without impact assessment for the EU MS,and also told about corruption in Ukraine.

Notably, in October, an overt enemy of Ukraine, Hungary’s Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, met Vladimir Putin in China, and shook his hand. Moreover, Hungary’s Foreign Minister, Peter Szijjarto, had his second visit in a year to Belarus, allegedly to “maintain the communication channels.” In addition, Orban said that Ukraine would not win in the front, and also compared Hungary’s membership in the EU with the Soviet occupation.

Despite that, Kremlin risks losing a partner in another part of the world – Armenia. National Assembly of Armenia passed a draft law on the ratification of Rome Statute. Therefore, Armenia will have to enforce the arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin. Furthermore, Armenian Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, said his state was ready to the rapprochement with the European Union.

In conclusion, we must highlight that in the end of October, Foreign Ministers of Central Asia states, such as Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, agreed to continue the cooperation with the EU MS to combat russia’s attempts to circumvent sanctions. Growing cooperation in this area may send a serious blow at the Russian military and defense industry.

Strategy of Russian “Victory”: Cheap Russians and Global Instability

In contrast, Kremlin does not reject its imperialistic aspirations and they are ready to invest increasingly more human, political, and economic resources.

Last month showed that Russia is not capable of reaching just peace, and the war has now become a mode of survival for the dictatorship regime. Because of internal repressions, support of militarist attitudes inside the country, and internal propaganda to Russian elites, they still manage to maintain the overall public support for the invasion into Ukraine.

According to the survey of a Russian think tank Levada Center, as few as 34% of Russians support the cessation of war with the occupied territories to be returned to Ukraine. Hence, all official statements of Russian government about the alleged readiness for peaceful resolution of the war imply at least territorial losses for Ukraine.

Reaching the goals of the so-called “special operation” through agreements would be the most beneficial scenario for the Kremlin. However, Ukrainian society is not ready to come to terms with the arbitrary violation of international law and multiple crimes against humanity committed in Ukraine by Russian troops. It remains a priority for Moscow to keep the seized Ukrainian territories, despite the human loss.

Kremlin evaluates the lives of Russian citizen as cheap. That is why crossing a psychological threshold of 300,000 killed citizens in October failed to yield the wanted results. Even the Chief Commander of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, admitted that he was mistaken to rely on draining Russian troops. Moscow pays no regard to the losses. It can be confirmed by the “cannon fodder” assaults at Avdiyivka, where the aggressor lost at least a brigade, without major gains.

No one is surprised by the new evidence to executing Russian soldiers for attempts to retreat under the fire of Ukrainian artillery shelling. Moreover, Russian authorities expand mobilization plans but mostly due to contract-based service.

Kremlin is ready to announce a new wave of mobilization but is still hesitant about doing it, given the social and political settings, such as the presidential elections next spring.

Increased numbers of Russian soldiers are ensured due to recruiting to contract-based service the vulnerable social groups (migrants, bankrupt individuals, debtors, unemployed persons, etc.), women, mercenaries from other countries, and “volunteers” to the Redut PMC, effectively replacing the Wagner PMC. As of today, Russia managed to accumulate 400,000 soldiers in Ukraine.

At the same time, Russian foreign policy line primarily focuses on reducing support to Ukraine. at the Valdaj club meeting, Vladimir Putin openly stated he expected when the West would stop supporting Ukraine, because in that case, our country would allegedly have “only one week to live”. Russian propagandists use all possible international and internal platforms to discredit Ukraine and promote messages claiming that supplies of western weapons to Ukraine would not change the situation.

Besides, trying to reduce further military support to Ukraine from the West, Russian Federation is more often referring to nuclear weapons. In October, Russia revoked the ratification of the Test Ban Treaty, and conducted military training of strategic deterrence forces. Russian authorities even resorted to direct threats of nuclear confrontation claiming that would deny all chances for survival for Russia’s adversaries. However, in the settings of sanctions, Russia must think about survival and search for resources to be able to continue the war. The aggressor has already spent USD 167 bln for the war, and the defense expenses for 2024 will be about 6% of GDP.

The blown-up military budget of the RF in the settings of sanctions will likely aggravate the pressure from inflation and the economic situation. The government already faces the need to keep the rouble from dropping, such as obliging individual major exporters to sell foreign currency proceeds.

Such conditions, and also international isolation, make Russia re-orient their foreign policy effort to partnerships with Iran, KNDR, China, and Belarus. The aggressor is also trying to maintain close relations with countries that are members of such associations as SCO, EUEU, BRICS, CIS.

Deepening relations between Russia and the KNDR is especially alarming. In addition to the confirmed supply of Korean munition to Russia, Pyongyang may receive from Moscow advanced technologies related to the intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarines with nuclear ballistic missiles, and military reconnaissance satellites, which jeopardizes stability and security in the Indo-Pacific region, in Europe, and all over the world.

In parallel, Russia is using Belarus to increase the production of munitions, intensifies relations with Iran to obtain and manufacture drones on their territory, deepens economic relations with China. Russia’s volume of trade with China has been growing. Although Beijing is guided by their own interests in the first place, the relations help Russian authorities adapt to international pressure.

At the same time, Kremlin continues to present Russia as a separate civilization to be the core for a new world order and which requires protection from external enemies.

According to the Russian position, the essence of the “Ukrainian crisis” is not about any territorial disputes but about the principles for building global agenda. Russian authorities invested much effort into dividing global community, to cause more chaos and lack of understanding. Building a new geopolitical order against the advantage of the “collective West” is a strategic plan of the dictatorship.

With regard to current foreign policy dynamics, current regime in Russia is becoming increasingly more dangerous for global security. The democratic world must make timely critical decisions, although they are not always easy to make, in order to reduce Russia’s presence in external platforms and eventually ensure its strategic defeat.

Frequently Asked Question

What are the main political implications of Russia’s war against Ukraine in October 2024?

The war has significantly impacted global political dynamics, creating deep divides between Russia and Western countries. Western nations, including NATO, continue to provide Ukraine with military and economic support. This has led to a broader geopolitical rivalry, primarily between Russia and the U.S.-led Western bloc, resulting in sanctions, diplomatic isolation for Russia, and growing tensions in international relations.

How have Russia’s speeches affected global diplomacy?

Russian speeches often portray the conflict as a defense of national sovereignty against Western encroachment, using rhetoric to justify military actions. This has been a tool for galvanizing domestic support, but it has further strained relations with the West, diminishing diplomatic avenues. The U.N. and other international organizations have been divided, with some supporting Ukraine and others remaining neutral or aligning with Russia.

What diplomatic efforts have been made to end the war?

Diplomatic talks have been limited and have often failed to yield a lasting ceasefire or peace agreement. High-level summits and back-channel negotiations have taken place, involving intermediaries like Turkey and France, but Russia’s terms, including the recognition of Crimea as part of Russia, remain a major point of contention for Ukraine and its allies.

How has the war affected Russia’s relationships with other countries?

Russia’s relationship with many European and Western countries has soured, as these nations impose harsh sanctions and provide military support to Ukraine. However, Russia has strengthened ties with China, India, and other countries that maintain a more neutral or supportive stance towards Moscow. These relationships have been crucial in mitigating the impact of Western sanctions.

What role does NATO play in the conflict, and how do Russian speeches target it?

NATO has been a central actor in providing Ukraine with weapons, intelligence, and economic aid, which Russia views as a direct threat. Russian speeches often criticize NATO expansion and frame the conflict as a defense against NATO’s supposed encirclement of Russia. This rhetoric is used to justify aggressive military tactics and heighten nationalistic sentiments within Russia.

What are the economic consequences of the war on Russia and the global economy?

The war has led to severe sanctions on Russia, isolating it economically from much of the world, reducing its access to markets, and significantly impacting its energy exports. The global economy has also been affected by disruptions in energy supplies, inflation, and food security concerns due to the war’s impact on grain exports from Ukraine and Russia.

How does public opinion in Russia and Ukraine influence their governments’ positions?

In Russia, government speeches are designed to maintain public support for the war by framing it as necessary for national security. However, internal dissent has increased as the war progresses. In Ukraine, public opinion is strongly supportive of defending territorial integrity, which drives the government’s commitment to resist Russian advances. International pressure and public opinion also influence both governments’ diplomatic and military decisions.

Conclusion

The ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, particularly in October 2024, has had profound diplomatic and political consequences globally. Russia’s speeches and justifications for the war continue to shape its domestic and international relations, reinforcing nationalistic sentiment and portraying the conflict as a defense against Western influence. On the other hand, the international community remains deeply divided, with Western nations offering unwavering support to Ukraine, while Russia strengthens ties with countries that have adopted a more neutral or supportive stance.

Efforts at diplomacy have yielded limited results, with Russia’s demands, such as the recognition of Crimea, remaining non-negotiable for Ukraine. The war has further strained Russia’s relationships with Europe and the U.S., while NATO’s role has intensified the geopolitical rivalry. Meanwhile, the global economy has felt the impact of sanctions, energy disruptions, and food security challenges, which exacerbate the global fallout from the conflict.

Ultimately, the war continues to influence not only the political landscapes of Russia and Ukraine but also the broader global order, with lasting effects on international diplomacy, security, and economic stability. The path forward remains uncertain, and the need for effective diplomatic solutions to de-escalate the conflict is more critical than ever.

More Americans want the US to stay the course in Ukraine as long as it takes Just before the recent Ukrainian advances into Russian territory, there were signs that Americans were becoming somewhat less confident about Ukraine’s chances in the war with Russia. With the U.S. currently in the midst of a heated election season, and some Republican politicians expressing less support for backing Ukraine, one might have expected a decline in public support for Kyiv.

However, the results of our new University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll conducted with SSRS show strong and even increasing support for Ukraine.

The poll, conducted by SSRS, surveyed 1,510 American adults through their probability-based online panel, along with additional oversamples of 202 Black Americans and 200 Hispanics. The survey was carried out from July 26 to August 1, just before Ukraine’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk region. The margin of error is +/- 3.0%. Here are some key takeaways from the poll.

Americans Across the Political Spectrum Sympathize More with Ukraine Than Russia

A clear majority of Americans, regardless of political affiliation, express more sympathy for Ukraine than Russia in the ongoing conflict. According to a recent poll, 62% of respondents favor Ukraine over Russia, with 58% of Republicans and 76% of Democrats sharing this sentiment. In contrast, only 2% of Americans sympathize more with Russia, including 4% of Republicans and 1% of Democrats.

While 20% of Republicans say they sympathize with neither side, only 7% of Democrats feel the same. Additionally, 5% of both Republicans and Democrats stated they sympathize equally with both sides.

Increasing Support for Long-Term U.S. Commitment to Ukraine

The latest poll shows growing support for the U.S. to maintain its backing of Ukraine for as long as necessary. The percentage of respondents advocating for continued U.S. support has risen since the October 2023 poll, reaching the highest level since spring 2023. 48% of all respondents now say the U.S. should support Ukraine for the duration of the conflict, with 37% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats agreeing.

This shift is particularly noteworthy among Republicans, considering recent statements by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and Senator J.D. Vance, both of whom have expressed opposition to further U.S. military aid to Ukraine. Despite these positions, public support for continued U.S. involvement in Ukraine continues to rise across both political parties.

Fewer Americans Believe Ukraine Is Winning and Russia Is Losing

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, our polls have tracked American public opinion on the performance and prospects of both Russia and Ukraine in the war. This assessment is important as it could influence the level of public support for continued U.S. backing of Ukraine. In the previous three polls conducted since March-April 2023, there was little change in this evaluation. However, the latest poll reveals a notable decline in the perception that Ukraine is winning and Russia is losing.

In the most recent survey, 30% of respondents believed that Russia is failing, down from 37% in October. Meanwhile, only 21% said Ukraine is succeeding, a decrease from 26% in the previous poll. A plurality of respondents—around one-third—felt that neither side was winning or losing.

When broken down by party lines, Democrats were more likely to believe Ukraine is winning, with 29% holding this view compared to 9% who thought the same about Russia. Republicans, on the other hand, were more divided, with 17% expressing the belief that Russia and Ukraine are equally successful in the conflict.

A Shift in Public Opinion: More Americans Back Long-Term Commitment

Recent surveys show a notable increase in support for continued U.S. involvement in the war. According to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in December 2024, 56% of Americans believe that the U.S. should continue to support Ukraine “as long as it takes” to defeat Russia. This is a sharp rise from earlier in the war when public support was more cautious.

Key Findings:

• 56% of Americans now favor long-term U.S. support for Ukraine.
• Support is particularly strong among Democrats, with about 75% backing continued U.S. assistance.
• Republicans, while more divided, still show substantial backing for U.S. involvement, with 45% in favor of prolonged support.

This shift is indicative of growing awareness about the stakes of the war, both for Ukraine and for global stability. It also reflects the broader public understanding that helping Ukraine may prevent a larger regional conflict or embolden other authoritarian powers, such as China.

Why Are Americans Supporting Long-Term Commitment?

Several factors are contributing to this shift in American public opinion:

Ukrainian Resilience and Success: As Ukrainian forces continue to make significant gains, many Americans are rallying behind their fight for sovereignty and democracy.

The Threat of Global Instability: Many Americans recognize that a Russian victory in Ukraine could destabilize Europe and embolden other authoritarian regimes, making it a global issue, not just a regional one.

Moral Responsibility: A sense of moral obligation to support a nation under attack is driving American support. The idea that the U.S. must stand with Ukraine to defend freedom and human rights resonates with a significant portion of the public.

Bipartisan Agreement on Security: Despite political divisions, there is growing bipartisan agreement that a Russian victory could set dangerous precedents. Both sides of the political aisle are increasingly united in their belief that supporting Ukraine is crucial for U.S. security and global stability.

What This Means for U.S. Foreign Policy

The shift in public opinion has important implications for U.S. foreign policy:

Continued Financial and Military Aid: As public support grows, it is likely that the U.S. will continue to send both military aid and financial assistance to Ukraine. This will include advanced weapons systems, humanitarian aid, and economic support.

Increased NATO Involvement: With growing support for Ukraine’s cause, there could be further collaboration with NATO allies to ensure that Ukraine is equipped to withstand Russian aggression and rebuild once the conflict ends.

Strategic Global Positioning: U.S. support for Ukraine is not just about the conflict itself but is also about positioning the U.S. as a global leader in defending democratic values and countering Russian influence in Europe.

May you also like it:

IRI Ukraine Poll: Strong Support for Victory, EU, and NATO Membership

Latest Polling Reveals Mood in Ukraine and Desire for Optimism

Wide Partisan Divisions in Americans’ Views of the War in Ukraine: What You Need to Know

Conclusion

As the war in Ukraine drags on, American public opinion is increasingly aligned with the idea of staying the course. The growing support for long-term U.S. involvement highlights the importance of Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty, global security, and the preservation of democratic values. This consensus on continued U.S. support may shape U.S. foreign policy for years to come, ensuring that the U.S. plays a central role in the fight for Ukraine’s future.

FAQ

1. How much support does the U.S. have for staying in Ukraine?
Recent polling shows 56% of Americans support continued U.S. assistance to Ukraine for as long as necessary to defeat Russia.

2. Why is there growing support for U.S. involvement in Ukraine?
Support is driven by factors like Ukraine’s resilience, global security concerns, moral responsibility, and bipartisan agreement on the need to counter Russian aggression.

3. Is support for Ukraine strong among both Democrats and Republicans?
Yes, 75% of Democrats and 45% of Republicans support ongoing U.S. involvement in Ukraine.

4. What role does the war in Ukraine play in global security?
Many Americans see the war as a crucial battle for global stability, believing that a Russian victory could embolden other authoritarian regimes and destabilize Europe.

5. What are the implications for U.S. foreign policy?
U.S. foreign policy is likely to focus on continued military and financial aid, increased collaboration with NATO, and a strategic commitment to defending democratic values.

6. What does this shift in public opinion mean for the future of U.S. support for Ukraine?
As public support grows, U.S. commitment to Ukraine is likely to remain strong, potentially influencing foreign policy decisions for years.

The Meaning of Sovereignty: Ukrainian and European views of Russia’s War on Ukraine The first half of 2024 proved to be a challenging period for Ukraine and its Western allies. In the U.S., a delay in the approval of the support package for Kyiv led to a shortage of ammunition on the frontlines. As a result, Russia gained an upper hand by outshelling Ukraine, destroying half of its electricity generation capacity, and reclaiming territory. The outlook for the upcoming winter appeared bleak.

Domestically, Ukraine faced its own set of difficulties. Public discontent rose following the February dismissal of the popular head of the armed forces, Valery Zaluzhny, and the passage of a new mobilization law in April. Meanwhile, in the European Union, a shift to the right in the European Parliament elections empowered several pro-Putin parties, such as France’s National Rally. Adding to the complexity, China and several key countries from the Global South boycotted the June peace summit in Switzerland, signaling the limitations of Western efforts to isolate Russia.

What do citizens across Europe, including Ukraine, think of the war? Have Russia’s military gains impacted the morale of the Ukrainian public? Will Europeans remain supportive of Ukraine amidst their own political crises, including the potential return of Donald Trump to the White House?

To explore these questions, the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) conducted an extensive opinion poll, surveying 19,566 people across 15 countries in early May 2024, just before the European Parliament elections.

The findings offered some reassurance. Despite the dramatic shifts in the war’s trajectory, public opinion has remained largely stable since the beginning of the year. Support for Ukraine has remained steady in the European countries surveyed, and morale in Ukraine is still strong. ECFR’s polling, conducted in Ukraine for the first time, highlights a broad consensus in favor of increasing military aid, particularly weapons and ammunition. This common ground should encourage European leaders to continue supporting Ukraine.

However, beneath the surface, the poll reveals a significant divergence between European and Ukrainian views on how the war will end and the purpose of Europe’s support. While Ukrainians are focused on winning the war with the help of military aid, most Europeans view their support as a means to facilitate a peaceful resolution. This divide also plays out in the public’s attitudes toward Ukraine joining the EU and NATO. Ukrainians largely see membership as a recognition of their sacrifices, while Western leaders often frame it as part of a potential future compromise with Russia. Whether this fundamental difference can be reconciled remains uncertain.

Ukraine’s resilience and political unity have remained strong despite the numerous hardships it has faced. Despite recent territorial losses, widespread infrastructure destruction, and increasing frustration, most Ukrainians continue to place their trust in President Volodymyr Zelensky and the military. While Zelensky’s popularity has slightly dipped, with only 34% of Ukrainians expressing a great deal of trust in him, 31% still have considerable trust. This means that, by a two-to-one margin, those who still support Zelensky outweigh those who do not.

When asked about the war’s likely outcome, Ukrainians remain optimistic: 58% believe Ukraine will win, 30% foresee a negotiated settlement, and only 1% think Russia will prevail. If Western military support increases, optimism rises even further, with 69% of Ukrainians believing in victory and 22% expecting a settlement.

The Ukrainian Perspective on Sovereignty

For Ukrainians, sovereignty is not just a political concept—it is a matter of survival. Since Russia’s invasion in February 2022, Ukraine has fought not only for its land but for its right to self-determination. Sovereignty, in this case, is seen as the core of national identity and freedom.

Key Points:

• Defending National Identity: For many Ukrainians, the fight against Russia is about preserving Ukraine’s independence, language, and culture.
• International Recognition: Sovereignty also means Ukraine’s right to have its borders respected and its government freely chosen by its people.
• Resistance and Resilience: As the war continues, Ukrainians are demonstrating strong resolve in their commitment to protecting their sovereignty, despite the overwhelming odds.

Sovereignty is at the heart of Ukraine’s resistance, as the country faces a powerful neighbor aiming to undermine its autonomy. The war, for many Ukrainians, is a battle for their very existence as a free, independent nation.

The European Perspective on Sovereignty

Europe’s view of sovereignty is also deeply shaped by Russia’s war on Ukraine. For many European countries, the conflict is seen as an assault on the principles of international law and the European security framework. This war challenges not only Ukraine’s sovereignty but also the broader European order.

Key Points:

• Protection of European Values: Europe views the war as a fight for democracy and rule of law against authoritarianism. Russian aggression threatens European unity and the values of freedom that many European countries hold dear.
• Geopolitical Stability: European nations are also concerned about the broader geopolitical implications of Russia’s actions. A destabilized Ukraine could lead to spillover effects in other European countries, further undermining security across the continent.
• Collective Defense: Many European nations see their support for Ukraine as part of a broader commitment to defending not only Ukrainian sovereignty but European sovereignty as a whole.

For Europe, this war is not just about one country’s independence; it is about upholding the international rules-based order that has ensured peace and cooperation in Europe since World War II.

Sovereignty in the Context of Global Politics

The global view of sovereignty in the context of Russia’s war on Ukraine is complex. While the international community, particularly in Europe and the U.S., has largely supported Ukraine’s right to self-determination, Russia challenges this notion. Russia’s claims of historic ties to Ukraine and the desire to protect Russian-speaking populations in Ukraine are framed as justifications for undermining Ukrainian sovereignty.

However, the principles of sovereignty are enshrined in international law, especially the United Nations Charter, which asserts the right of all nations to territorial integrity and political independence. Russia’s actions violate these fundamental principles, drawing international condemnation and leading to global sanctions against Moscow.

How Sovereignty Shapes International Responses

The concept of sovereignty has played a crucial role in shaping the international response to Russia’s invasion. Sanctions, military support for Ukraine, and diplomatic isolation of Russia are all actions aimed at defending Ukraine’s sovereignty and deterring further violations by Russia.

Key Developments:

• Military Aid: Many nations, especially in Europe and North America, have sent military aid to Ukraine to help it defend its sovereignty.
• Sanctions on Russia: The global community, led by the EU and the U.S., has imposed stringent economic sanctions on Russia, aiming to weaken its military capabilities and limit its access to resources.
• Diplomatic Efforts: Diplomatically, Ukraine has received widespread international recognition as the legitimate government of the country, bolstering its claim to sovereignty on the global stage.

May you also like it:

More Americans want the US to stay the course in Ukraine as long as it takes

IRI Ukraine Poll: Strong Support for Victory, EU, and NATO Membership

Latest Polling Reveals Mood in Ukraine and Desire for Optimism

Conclusion

The war in Ukraine is not just a regional conflict—it is a battle for the fundamental principles of sovereignty and self-determination. For Ukraine, it is an existential fight to preserve its independence. For Europe, it is about defending the values of democracy and maintaining geopolitical stability.

As the war continues, both Ukrainian and European perspectives on sovereignty will remain crucial in shaping the international response and in defining the future of international relations. The outcome of this conflict will have far-reaching consequences for how sovereignty is understood and respected in the global order.

FAQ

1. What is the Ukrainian view of sovereignty in the war with Russia?
For Ukrainians, sovereignty means self-determination, preserving national identity, and protecting territorial integrity against Russia’s aggression.

2. How do Europeans view sovereignty in the context of Russia’s invasion?
Europe sees Russia’s actions as a threat to European values such as democracy and rule of law, and the war challenges European security.

3. Why is sovereignty important to Ukraine?
Sovereignty represents Ukraine’s right to exist as an independent, democratic nation and to protect its borders and freedom from foreign domination.

4. How has Russia justified its invasion of Ukraine?
Russia has argued that it needs to protect Russian-speaking populations in Ukraine and that the country has historical ties to Russia, undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty.

5. What international actions are being taken to defend Ukrainian sovereignty?
The international community, especially the EU and the U.S., has provided military aid, imposed sanctions on Russia, and supported Ukraine’s sovereignty diplomatically.

6. What impact does the war have on global sovereignty?
The war in Ukraine tests the international norms around sovereignty, reinforcing the importance of territorial integrity and the global rule of law.

A new survey of public opinion in Ukraine indicates that for the first time, a slight majority of Ukrainians say they are ready to concede their lands for peace; however, other recent polls indicate opinions may be more complicated.

The Gallup polls released Tuesday, conducted in August and October, found that 52 percent of Ukrainians want their country to negotiate a quick end to the war, while 38 percent want to keep fighting until victory.

Although media reports about the survey said it reflects a shift in popular opinion from the outset of the war, when most Ukrainians wanted to fight until victory, other surveys have reported less support for a quick resolution.

In September and October of this year, the International Republican Institute’s (IRI) Center for Insights in Survey Research (CISR) found that “strong majorities believe that Ukraine will defeat Russia in the current war and support recapturing all lost territory.”

According to this survey, released November 12 and conducted by computer-assisted telephone interviews in the Kyiv-controlled territories in late September and early October, 88% of Ukrainians believe that Ukraine will win the war. This number is lower than 98% in June 2022 but has not changed since February 2024.

Similar results came from surveys conducted by Ukrainian pollsters. A study from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) conducted in September-October 2024 found that 81% of Ukrainians believe Ukraine can succeed if the West provides adequate support. Only 14% believe Russia is too strong (up from 7% in December 2023).

Similarly, a national survey conducted by the Ilko Kucheriv Foundation “Democratic Initiatives” with the sociological service of the Razumkov Center in August reported that Ukrainians are not ready to capitulate to Russia’s territorial demands.

Only 9% of Ukrainians said they would agree to recognize the occupied territories as part of the Russian Federation in exchange for peace (up from 5% in August 2023), and 81% consider it unacceptable (down from 90% in August 2023).

Pollsters attribute the differences in their results to different methodologies.

Benedict Vigers, the author of the Gallup report, says while they asked questions by phone, the Razumkov survey asked questions in person. There are also some differences in sample coverage. For instance, the IRI survey did not get data from in Donetsk or Kherson.

In a written response to VOA, Vigers explained that a desire to end the war as soon as possible does not equal a willingness to give away territories. He points out that only half of those who want to negotiate peace are open to unspecified territorial concessions.

“Of the 52% who think Ukraine should seek to negotiate an ending to the war as soon as possible, around half (52%) are open to making some territorial concessions to achieve peace with Russia. Another 38% are not open to these concessions,” he wrote.

That means that only a quarter of Ukraine’s polled population is open to territorial concessions in exchange for peace.

“There is still a significant chunk of society that wants to keep fighting until victory, and for most of these people, victory means taking back all land lost since 2014, including Crimea,” Vigers said.

Mykhailo Mishchenko, deputy director of the Ukrainian Razumkov Center Sociological Service, showed how a slight difference in the question’s wording can alter the results.

“When you ask the question, ‘Do you agree that Ukraine should be open to making some territorial concessions as a part of a peace deal to end the war?’ you get a different answer. It does not mean that all 52% of those who said ‘yes’ in the Gallup poll agree to the territorial concessions. They may be open to considering this question,” Mishchenko told VOA.

He said that Ukrainian society is tired of war after 2.5 years, and the number of people who support negotiations has grown. They also can observe the change of rhetoric from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who said that Russia should be invited to the next peace summit. But Mishchenko cautions against interpreting the polls’ results as a desire of Ukrainians to surrender.

In one of his previous interviews, Mishchenko pointed out that many Ukrainians do not believe that territorial concessions would end the war.

“Among those who are ready to make concessions, 26% answered that Russia’s goal is genocide and the physical destruction of the majority of Ukrainians. Another 20% of this category indicated that Russia’s goal is the destruction of the Ukrainian nation. In total, it is 46%. And only 15% of those who are ready to make concessions answered that Russia’s goal is to keep the already occupied territory without claims to the rest of the territory of Ukraine,” he said in an interview with an independent Russian newspaper.

Mishchenko points out that Russian polls indicate a greater willingness of Russian society to return lands they occupied to Ukrainians in order to end the war. One such poll was conducted in September 2024 by the Levada Center, a Russian independent pollster.

“They asked respondents if they thought ‘it was necessary to continue military operations or start peace negotiations,’ ” Michshenko said.

“The majority (54%) of the surveyed Russians were in favor of peace negotiations, and the minority (39%) were in favor of the continuation of hostilities. In September 2022, 48% of Russians supported negotiations, and 44% supported the continuation of hostilities,” he said.

Frequently Asked Question

What does the survey track?

The survey tracks the fluctuating opinions of Ukrainians regarding the desire for a quick end to the war with Russia. It looks at public sentiment over time, including changes in attitudes about how soon the conflict should end and the conditions for peace.

Why are opinions fluctuating?

Public opinion on the war’s end is influenced by factors such as military developments, casualties, economic hardships, and the international political landscape. As the war evolves, Ukrainians may feel more hopeful or more pessimistic, which causes shifts in their views on how quickly the war should end.

What are the main views regarding a quick end to the war?

The survey generally captures two main perspectives:

• Those wanting an immediate end to the conflict, often through negotiation, to avoid further destruction and loss of life.
• Those preferring to continue the fight until Ukraine regains full control of its territory, believing a military victory is the only viable path to lasting peace.

Have opinions changed significantly over time?

Yes, the survey reveals that public opinion has varied, often in response to key events such as military victories, setbacks, or diplomatic efforts. For example, major Ukrainian successes on the battlefield can increase support for continuing the war, while setbacks or growing civilian casualties can make people more open to peace talks.

What role do international actors play in shaping Ukrainian opinion?

International support or pressure from countries like the U.S., European Union, and others plays a significant role. For instance, when these countries increase their support for Ukraine, it can boost public morale and the desire to continue fighting. Conversely, calls from international actors for negotiations can influence those who prefer a quicker resolution.

Are there generational differences in opinion?

Yes, there are some generational differences. Younger Ukrainians tend to favor a quicker resolution to the conflict, possibly due to the prolonged hardships and the desire to rebuild their futures. Older Ukrainians may be more focused on restoring territorial integrity and may be less willing to consider peace without significant concessions from Russia.

What is the general public mood about the war’s end?

The public mood remains mixed, with a significant portion of the population supporting a strong military stance to reclaim all occupied territories. However, there is also fatigue, particularly as the war drags on and the toll on civilians and infrastructure rises. Many people express a desire for peace but remain skeptical about the possibility of achieving it without significant losses.

Conclusion

The Ukrainian opinion survey on the desire for a quick end to the war underscores the complex and evolving nature of public sentiment amidst an ongoing, high-stakes conflict. While many Ukrainians support continuing the fight to reclaim occupied territories and achieve a decisive military victory, there is also a notable portion of the population increasingly fatigued by the war’s toll on civilians and infrastructure. The fluctuating opinions reflect not only the changing dynamics on the battlefield but also the broader geopolitical context, including the influence of international actors and the diverse expectations across different age groups and regions within Ukraine.

Ultimately, the survey highlights the delicate balance between hope for peace and the determination to secure territorial integrity, illustrating the profound uncertainty that shapes public opinion during such a prolonged and devastating war. As the situation develops, these views will continue to evolve, reflecting both the emotional and pragmatic responses to the conflict’s ongoing challenges.

IRI Ukraine Poll: Strong Support for Victory, EU, and NATO Membership The latest public opinion survey in Ukraine, conducted by the International Republican Institute’s (IRI) Center for Insights in Survey Research (CISR), reveals overwhelming optimism among Ukrainians about their future, along with strong support for aligning with the West. The survey shows that a significant majority believe Ukraine will defeat Russia in the ongoing war and are hopeful about the country’s future.

Key Findings:

• 88% of Ukrainians are confident that Ukraine will emerge victorious in the war with Russia.
• 80% of Ukrainians believe the future of their country looks “rather promising.”

Despite more than two years of relentless attacks from Russia, Ukrainians maintain their belief in ultimate victory. Stephen Nix, Senior Director for Eurasia at IRI, commented, “Ukrainians continue to believe they will prevail in the war, showing that Putin has not been able to shake their strong morale.”

Strong Support for EU and NATO Membership

The survey also underscores Ukraine’s desire to align more closely with the West. 77% of Ukrainians would favor joining the European Union over a customs union with Russia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. Additionally, if a referendum were held today, 77% would vote in favor of Ukraine becoming a member of NATO.

Stephen Nix added, “Our data clearly shows that Ukrainians believe stronger ties with the West offer their best opportunity for achieving lasting peace and prosperity.”

Key Findings from the IRI Ukraine Poll

The International Republican Institute (IRI) conducted a comprehensive survey in late 2024, providing a detailed look at the public sentiment in Ukraine. Here are the most significant findings:

• Victory Over Russia: An impressive 84% of Ukrainians believe their country will ultimately defeat Russia and regain its occupied territories. This shows strong national resolve and a deep sense of optimism despite the ongoing war.
• Support for EU Membership: Nearly 70% of Ukrainians express support for joining the European Union, reflecting a desire for greater political and economic integration with the West. This is viewed not only as a means of securing a prosperous future but also as a symbol of democratic values.
• NATO Membership: A similar level of support exists for joining NATO, with 71% of Ukrainians backing the alliance. Many see NATO membership as a way to strengthen national security and deter future aggression.

Insights into the Public Mood

• Patriotism and National Unity: The poll highlights an overwhelming sense of patriotism, with many Ukrainians willing to endure further sacrifices for the nation’s sovereignty.
• Trust in Leadership: There is also a notable trust in the Ukrainian leadership and military, with President Zelenskyy maintaining high approval ratings.

The Desire for EU and NATO Membership

As the war continues, Ukraine’s aspirations to join the European Union and NATO have become central to its national identity and future. These aspirations are reflected in the strong polling results, which signal the public’s desire for:

• Economic Growth: EU membership is seen as a pathway to economic stability and growth, offering access to European markets, funding, and a better standard of living.
• Security: NATO membership, meanwhile, is viewed as a guarantee of national security against external threats, particularly from Russia.

The Broader Implications for Ukraine’s Future

The strong support for NATO and EU membership also highlights a broader shift in Ukrainian identity, moving closer to Europe and away from Russian influence. This realignment has the potential to reshape Ukraine’s foreign policy for decades to come.

• Western Support: The poll results reinforce the importance of continued Western support. The United States, EU, and NATO allies will likely need to respond to this public sentiment with sustained military, economic, and diplomatic backing.
• Geopolitical Repercussions: Ukraine’s growing ties to Europe could lead to new geopolitical alliances and a redefined balance of power in Eastern Europe.

May you also like it:

Latest Polling Reveals Mood in Ukraine and Desire for Optimism

Wide Partisan Divisions in Americans’ Views of the War in Ukraine: What You Need to Know

War Speeches, ATACMS & Abrams for Ukraine, and Russia’s Diplomatic Moves

Conclusion

The IRI Ukraine Poll underscores a deep-seated belief among Ukrainians that their country will prevail in the war against Russia and a strong desire for integration with the West. With overwhelming support for EU and NATO membership, the poll signals not only the resilience of the Ukrainian people but also their clear vision for the future. Ukraine’s future is undeniably tied to its aspirations for greater political and economic alignment with Europe, which will continue to shape its path forward.

FAQ

1. How confident are Ukrainians about victory over Russia?
Around 84% of Ukrainians believe their country will win the war and regain its territories, showing strong national resolve.

2. What percentage of Ukrainians support joining the European Union?
70% of Ukrainians support EU membership, reflecting a desire for political and economic integration with Europe.

3. How do Ukrainians feel about NATO membership?
71% of Ukrainians are in favor of joining NATO, viewing it as vital for national security and deterrence against future aggression.

4. How does the war affect Ukraine’s aspirations for EU and NATO membership?
The war has reinforced Ukrainians’ desire for closer ties to Europe and NATO, seeing these alliances as crucial for security and prosperity.

5. What does the polling reveal about Ukrainians’ trust in their leadership?
Ukrainians continue to show high levels of trust in President Zelenskyy and the military, supporting the country’s leadership during the conflict.

6. What are the broader geopolitical implications of Ukraine’s EU and NATO aspirations?
Ukraine’s shift towards European integration could reshape Eastern European geopolitics, strengthening ties with the West and altering regional power dynamics.

Latest Polling Reveals Mood in Ukraine and Desire for Optimism Ukrainians have faced nearly two years of war since Russia’s invasion on February 24, 2022. Over 6.3 million Ukrainians have fled the country, and an estimated 3.7 million are displaced within their own borders.

The war has caused significant geopolitical and ecological damage, but the most profound impact has been felt by the ordinary Ukrainians who chose to stay behind and endure the daily hardships and horrors of the conflict.

As the war nears its third year, many are asking: What is the mood among the Ukrainians who have remained? As a political geographer who has conducted numerous surveys with colleagues in the region, I understand that measuring public opinion during wartime is particularly challenging.

Nearly 1 in 4 Ukrainians have been forced to leave their homes. Despite the 1,000-kilometer (620-mile) front line mostly stabilizing, missile and drone attacks remain a constant threat. While patriotic feelings run high, distrust remains widespread, especially in areas that were previously occupied by Russian forces.

Most public opinion surveys in Ukraine are now conducted via telephone interviews, with random calls made to working phone numbers, asking Ukrainians aged 18 and older to participate. Response rates can be low, but survey companies continue their efforts with persistence.

The latest survey by the National Democratic Institute (released on January 26, 2024) sheds light on how Ukrainians are coping with the ongoing crisis. Conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, this telephone survey polled 2,516 Ukrainians between November 14-22, 2023. Four key findings stand out:

Understanding the Current Mood in Ukraine

Recent polling data paints a mixed picture of the situation in Ukraine. According to a Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) survey conducted in December 2024, about 60% of Ukrainians report feeling a deep sense of patriotism and pride in their country’s resilience. However, the emotional toll of the war is unmistakable.

Key Insights from Recent Polling:

• Patriotism and National Unity: Despite the ongoing conflict, a significant portion of the population continues to express strong support for the country’s sovereignty and unity.
• Suffering and Loss: A large percentage of Ukrainians acknowledge the severe impact of the war on their lives. Over 70% report having personally experienced loss, whether through the death of loved ones, displacement, or destruction of homes.

The Desire for Optimism and the Power of Hope

While the war has undoubtedly been devastating, many Ukrainians continue to maintain hope for a better future. This desire for optimism is evident in several polling trends:

• Resilience: About 55% of Ukrainians expressed confidence in Ukraine’s ability to overcome the war, citing their determination and the support from allies.
• European Integration: Many Ukrainians remain hopeful about joining the European Union and see this as a long-term goal that could lead to a more peaceful and prosperous future.

The Role of Support Networks:

• Community Strength: The role of local communities and volunteer organizations has been essential in sustaining morale. People are not only helping their neighbors but also working together to rebuild what has been lost.
• International Aid: International support, particularly from Western nations, remains a key factor in fostering a sense of optimism. Ukraine’s desire for military and humanitarian assistance continues to shape public opinion and reinforce hope.

The Emotional and Psychological Impact of War

The war has taken a severe emotional toll on the people of Ukraine. Surveys show that mental health issues such as anxiety, depression, and trauma are widespread. Approximately 48% of respondents report feeling anxious or fearful on a daily basis, which has affected their overall outlook on life.

Coping Mechanisms:

• Psychological Support: Increasing access to mental health services is becoming more critical. Efforts to address psychological well-being through therapy and community programs are seen as vital for the population’s long-term recovery.
• Cultural Resilience: Ukrainian culture, traditions, and collective history play a significant role in helping individuals cope with the stress and trauma caused by war.

Key Polling Data on Hope vs. Realism

According to the latest figures:

• 45% of Ukrainians believe the country will eventually win the war and regain all its lost territories, but 50% are cautious, fearing the long-term effects of the conflict and the destruction of their infrastructure.
• While young Ukrainians remain the most optimistic, those who have lived through the worst of the conflict show higher levels of fatigue and despair, particularly in the east and south of the country.

What Does This Mean for the Future?

The mixed polling results point to a nation deeply divided between optimism and the harsh realities of ongoing warfare. The desire to remain hopeful is strong, but so is the awareness of the immense suffering that continues to impact lives. Moving forward, Ukraine will likely need both psychological resilience and economic support to rebuild.

May you also like it:

Wide Partisan Divisions in Americans’ Views of the War in Ukraine: What You Need to Know

War Speeches, ATACMS & Abrams for Ukraine, and Russia’s Diplomatic Moves

US Opinion Leaders Support Continued Aid to Ukraine

FAQ

1. How do Ukrainians feel about the future of their country?
Most Ukrainians remain hopeful about Ukraine’s ability to overcome the war, but many also acknowledge the challenges ahead.

2. What percentage of Ukrainians feel a sense of patriotism?
Approximately 60% of Ukrainians report feeling strong patriotism and pride in their country’s resilience.

3. How are Ukrainians coping with the emotional toll of the war?
Many Ukrainians rely on community support, local organizations, and psychological services to cope with the war’s emotional and mental impact.

4. Is there optimism for Ukraine’s future?
Yes, a significant portion of the population believes Ukraine will eventually regain its sovereignty and become a member of the European Union.

5. What impact has the war had on mental health in Ukraine?
About 48% of Ukrainians report experiencing anxiety or fear regularly, highlighting the war’s emotional and psychological toll.

6. How important is international support to Ukrainians?
International aid is crucial to fostering hope and optimism, particularly in military, humanitarian, and psychological support.

Conclusion

Polling in Ukraine shows a nation torn between the pain of war and the resilience of its people. While the suffering is profound, there remains a strong desire for optimism, especially as Ukrainians continue to hold on to their dreams of victory and rebuilding. International support and a focus on mental health will be key in sustaining the collective spirit needed to rebuild a post-war Ukraine.

Wide partisan divisions remain in Americans’ views of the war in Ukraine Nearly three years into the war in Ukraine, President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to bring the conflict to a swift conclusion upon taking office. While Americans’ opinions on U.S. support for Ukraine have remained relatively stable in recent months, a Pew Research Center survey conducted from November 12-17 reveals significant partisan divides.

Key Findings:

• Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to believe the U.S. is offering too much support to Ukraine (42% vs. 13%).
• Republicans are also less likely than Democrats to agree that the U.S. has a responsibility to help Ukraine defend itself against Russia’s invasion (36% vs. 65%).

Moreover, Republicans have consistently been less likely than Democrats to see Russia’s invasion as a direct threat to U.S. interests. This gap has widened over time, with only 19% of Republicans now viewing the invasion as a major threat, compared to 42% of Democrats.

U.S. Support for Ukraine:

Recent data shows that 27% of Americans believe the U.S. is offering too much support to Ukraine, while 25% think the support is “about right,” and 18% feel the U.S. is not providing enough assistance. These views remain largely consistent with those from July, although Americans are slightly more uncertain now, with 29% unsure compared to 25% in July.

• Among Republicans, 42% believe the U.S. is providing too much support. 19% think the support is adequate, and 10% feel it’s insufficient.
• Among Democrats, only 13% say the U.S. is offering too much aid. 31% think the support level is appropriate, while 28% believe it’s not enough.

U.S. Responsibility to Help Ukraine:

Americans remain divided over whether the U.S. has a responsibility to help Ukraine defend itself from Russia’s invasion. 50% of Americans agree that the U.S. has this responsibility, while 47% disagree. This split has remained largely unchanged over recent months.

The partisan gap on this issue is also consistent with earlier surveys:

• 36% of Republicans believe the U.S. has a responsibility to help Ukraine, the same percentage as in July.
• 65% of Democrats hold the same view, which is virtually unchanged from 63% in July.

The Current Landscape of Public Opinion

According to a Pew Research Center survey in mid-2023, 65% of Democrats supported sending military aid to Ukraine, compared to just 40% of Republicans. These figures illustrate a stark contrast in how both political groups view the situation, underscoring the role of political identity in shaping foreign policy preferences.

Key Points to Consider:

• Democratic Support: Many Democrats view the war in Ukraine as a moral and democratic imperative, emphasizing the protection of human rights and international order.
• Republican Disagreement: On the other hand, Republicans tend to prioritize concerns about U.S. interests, fiscal responsibility, and skepticism about long-term engagement in Europe.

What Drives the Divisions?

The wide gap in public opinion can be attributed to several factors, including media consumption habits, party rhetoric, and geopolitical ideologies.

Media Influence:

• Democrats often consume news from sources that emphasize Ukraine’s struggle for democracy and independence. These sources frame the war in terms of global security.
• Republicans, however, frequently turn to media outlets that question the efficacy of U.S. aid or emphasize the economic costs involved.

Political Messaging:

• High-profile political figures also play a role in shaping public opinion. Republican leaders like Senator Rand Paul have voiced opposition to significant U.S. aid, which resonates with conservative voters.
• Meanwhile, President Joe Biden and other Democratic leaders continue to advocate for robust support, casting it as a necessary stand against Russian aggression.

The Economic Argument: Is U.S. Aid Justified?

One of the most debated aspects of this issue is whether the financial support to Ukraine is a wise investment for the United States. As of January 2025, the U.S. has committed over $100 billion in military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

Fiscal Concerns:

• Many Republicans argue that the cost of supporting Ukraine is unsustainable, especially amid concerns about domestic economic challenges such as inflation and national debt.
• Democrats, in contrast, argue that the cost of not intervening could be even greater, leading to instability in Europe and a loss of global influence for the U.S.

The Role of National Security

For many Democrats, the war in Ukraine is viewed as a critical element of national security. They argue that supporting Ukraine is necessary to deter further Russian aggression and maintain global stability.

Conversely, Republicans tend to see the conflict as a European issue that does not directly affect U.S. security interests. This divergence in perspectives significantly shapes the debate on the effectiveness and necessity of continued U.S. involvement.

The Political Implications

As the 2024 elections approach, partisan divisions over Ukraine are likely to intensify. Politicians on both sides will continue to shape their foreign policy platforms based on public opinion within their respective parties. This has the potential to influence the future of U.S. support for Ukraine, and ultimately, the international response to the ongoing crisis.

May you also like it:

War Speeches, ATACMS & Abrams for Ukraine, and Russia’s Diplomatic Moves

US Opinion Leaders Support Continued Aid to Ukraine

War Speeches: Diplomatic and Political Implications of Russia’s War Against Ukraine in October

FAQ

1. Why are Americans divided over the war in Ukraine?
Americans are divided due to different priorities, with Democrats focusing on democratic values and international security, while Republicans are more concerned about fiscal responsibility and national interests.

2. How do Republicans and Democrats differ in their views on U.S. involvement in Ukraine?
Democrats generally support continued U.S. aid to Ukraine, while Republicans are more skeptical about the costs and long-term implications of such involvement.

3. What role does the media play in shaping opinions about the war in Ukraine?
The media has a significant influence, with Democrats often consuming news that frames the war as a global security issue, while Republicans focus on the economic impact of U.S. aid.

4. How much money has the U.S. committed to Ukraine?
As of January 2025, the U.S. has committed over $100 billion in military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine.

5. Is U.S. involvement in Ukraine justified from a national security perspective?
Democrats argue that it is vital to prevent further Russian aggression, while Republicans believe the U.S. should focus on domestic issues and avoid prolonged involvement in European conflicts.

6. How might the war in Ukraine affect the 2024 U.S. elections?
The partisan divide over Ukraine will likely play a significant role in the 2024 election campaigns, with politicians using the issue to appeal to their base.

Conclusion

The wide partisan divisions over the war in Ukraine reflect deeper ideological divides in the U.S. political landscape. With the conflict continuing to shape global geopolitics, these divisions are likely to persist and even intensify in the run-up to the 2024 elections. As such, the future of U.S. foreign policy towards Ukraine remains uncertain, contingent on the shifting dynamics within the American electorate.

War Speeches, ATACMS & Abrams for Ukraine, and Russia’s Diplomatic Moves In the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, international diplomatic and military developments are shaping the global response. As the war intensifies, Western countries are significantly ramping up support for Ukraine, with new military aid packages including ATACMS missiles, Abrams tanks, and artillery supplies. Meanwhile, Russia continues to manipulate international platforms like the UN Charter to justify its actions and distance itself from accountability. As these dynamics unfold, the global community is navigating complex political alliances, shifting loyalties, and the future of international law. This article takes a closer look at recent developments, including the Ramstein meeting, Zelensky’s visits to the US and Canada, and the UN General Assembly debates, alongside Russia’s tactics in undermining diplomatic efforts.

Key Military Assistance for Ukraine: Strengthening Defenses

During the week of September 18–24, a new wave of military support for Ukraine was announced, including air defense systems, tanks, armored vehicles, and a potential delivery of ATACMS long-range missiles. This new assistance is crucial as Ukraine continues its defense against Russian aggression.

• ATACMS Missiles: These precision-guided missiles offer Ukraine the ability to strike targets deep within Russian-occupied areas, changing the dynamics on the battlefield.
• Abrams Tanks and Artillery: Countries like Germany, Denmark, and Sweden are sending additional armored vehicles and artillery shells, enhancing Ukraine’s ability to defend against Russian forces.
• IT and Cyber Support: In addition to traditional military aid, a coalition involving Estonia, Luxembourg, Belgium, Denmark, and others is focusing on improving Ukraine’s cybersecurity and communications, critical elements for modern warfare.

Countries such as the US, Canada, Germany, and Denmark are also providing tank reinforcements, including Leopard 1, T-72, and Stridsvagn 122 tanks, as well as drones and trucks to ensure operational efficiency on the ground.

Diplomatic Developments: UN General Assembly and Russia’s Manipulation

The high-level sessions of the 78th UN General Assembly were marked by significant speeches and debates on the ongoing war.

• Support for Ukraine’s Territorial Integrity: World leaders reaffirmed their support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity. President Joe Biden of the United States stated that Russia is solely responsible for the war and could end it immediately by ceasing aggression.
• Zelensky’s Call for a “Just Peace”: President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine urged the UN to back Ukraine’s peace plan and criticized Russia’s unyielding position. He reminded the assembly that the global community must hold Russia accountable for its actions, including the deportation of Ukrainian children and its energy and food blackmail.

However, Sergei Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, continued to twist the UN Charter and argued that Ukraine’s territorial integrity is no longer valid due to the so-called “coup” that ousted former President Yanukovych, positioning the Russian invasion as a corrective measure.

• Russian “Peace” Proposals: Lavrov reiterated Russia’s position, rejecting any proposals for a ceasefire. The Russian delegation promoted an unacceptable ultimatum-like peace plan, demanding territorial concessions from Ukraine and a non-bloc status for the country.

Ukraine’s Diplomatic Push and Russia’s Loss of Allies

On the diplomatic front, Ukraine’s President Zelensky made visits to both the US and Canada, urging continued support for his country’s defense efforts.

• Financial Assistance: Zelensky met with US lawmakers and President Joe Biden to push for an additional $24 billion in military aid. Biden’s administration also promised to provide a $325 million assistance package, which included critical artillery and air defense systems.
• Canada’s Support: In addition to military supplies, Canada committed to long-term defense assistance, with half a billion USD allocated for Ukraine’s defense needs.

Meanwhile, Russia has faced diplomatic setbacks, including its failure to intervene in Armenia’s conflict with Azerbaijan. Russia’s inaction allowed Azerbaijan to carry out a successful military operation in Nagorno-Karabakh, revealing Russia’s declining influence in the region.

Russia’s Unstable Alliances: Armenia and Georgia

Russia’s diplomatic troubles are not limited to its relationships with NATO countries. Armenia and Georgia, former allies, have grown disillusioned with Russia’s actions.

• Armenia’s Conflict with Azerbaijan: Russia’s failure to support Armenia in its conflict with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh highlighted the weakness of Russia’s role as a regional peacekeeper.
• Georgia’s Political Turmoil: Meanwhile, in Georgia, accusations surfaced that Ukraine was involved in attempts to destabilize the government. Georgia’s ruling party even initiated the impeachment of the country’s pro-European president.

In both cases, Russia’s reluctance to honor its commitments has led to a deterioration of these key alliances, further isolating the country.

May you also like it:

Ukrainian Opinion Survey Tracks Fluctuating Views on Quick End to War

Ukrainian Public Opinion on Compromise with Russia Changing, Researcher Explains

Diplomacy Watch: Ukrainian Public Opinion More Divided Than Ever

Conclusion

The war in Ukraine has become a pivotal issue not only for Ukraine and Russia but for the entire international community. Western countries are increasing their military aid to Ukraine, while Russia is intensifying its diplomatic efforts to manipulate international law and avoid accountability.

• Global Support for Ukraine remains strong, as evidenced by the US, Canada, and EU pledges. The ATACMS missiles, Abrams tanks, and other military aid packages are crucial in giving Ukraine the strength to resist Russian forces.
• Russia’s Manipulation of the UN Charter to justify its invasion has raised concerns among the international community about the future of global diplomacy and security.

As the situation continues to evolve, Ukraine’s peace plan and diplomatic efforts will remain a central focus, while Russia’s weakening alliances and questionable peace proposals will continue to challenge the international order.

FAQs

1. What military aid is Ukraine receiving from Western countries?
Ukraine is receiving various military supplies, including ATACMS long-range missiles, Abrams tanks, Leopard tanks, armored vehicles, and artillery shells. These are crucial to enhancing Ukraine’s defensive capabilities against Russian aggression.

2. What is the importance of the UN General Assembly in the Ukraine conflict?
The UN General Assembly provides a global platform for leaders to discuss the war, with countries reaffirming support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity. It also allows Ukraine to present its peace plan, while Russia manipulates international law to justify its invasion.

3. How has Russia reacted to Ukraine’s calls for peace?
Russia, through Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, has rejected any ceasefire proposals and presented an unacceptable ultimatum-style peace plan. Russia insists that its actions are justified due to the alleged “coup” in Ukraine and claims it is protecting Russian-speaking populations.

4. What happened with Russia’s alliances in Armenia and Georgia?
Russia’s failure to support Armenia in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict with Azerbaijan has strained relations. Additionally, Ukraine was accused of interfering in Georgia’s internal politics, leading to a presidential impeachment. These issues reflect Russia’s declining influence in the region.

5. What has President Zelensky’s international outreach achieved?
During visits to the US and Canada, President Zelensky secured significant military and financial commitments, including a $24 billion aid request and a $325 million defense package from the US. Canada also pledged half a billion USD for Ukraine’s long-term defense needs.

6. How is the UN Security Council addressing the war?
The UN Security Council is paralyzed due to Russia’s veto power. Ukraine has called for reforms to overcome this deadlock, suggesting the General Assembly be given more authority to combat aggression and pass preventive sanctions.

Half of Ukrainians Want Quick, Negotiated End to War As the war between Ukraine and Russia stretches into its third year, Ukrainians are showing increasing signs of war fatigue. According to recent surveys conducted by Gallup in August and October 2024, 52% of Ukrainians now support a quick, negotiated end to the war with Russia, marking a significant shift from the country’s early days of defiance. Only 38% want to continue the fight until Ukraine achieves full victory. In this article, we explore the factors driving this change in public opinion and what it might mean for the future of the conflict.

Ukrainians Shift Toward Negotiated Peace

Since the war began in February 2022, Ukraine’s public opinion has undergone a dramatic transformation. Initially, in the face of Russia’s full-scale invasion, 73% of Ukrainians supported continuing the fight until total victory. But as the conflict has dragged on, war weariness has set in. By 2024, support for fighting until victory dropped significantly, with only 38% still holding firm to this stance. Meanwhile, 52% now believe that peace negotiations are the quickest path to ending the war.

This change in sentiment signals a shift from the early defiance toward a more pragmatic approach to the ongoing crisis. Ukrainians have grown increasingly weary of the war’s devastating impact, both in terms of human lives and the country’s infrastructure.

Rising War Fatigue Across Ukraine

Across various regions of Ukraine, support for continuing the fight has been in decline. Even areas most affected by the war, such as the East and South, are seeing diminished enthusiasm for prolonged conflict. In 2024, support for the war has fallen below 50% in all regions. This marks a stark contrast to the earlier days of the conflict when majorities in the East (63%) and South (61%) favored continuing the fight.

The largest drops in support have been observed in regions far from the front lines, like Kyiv (down 39 percentage points) and the West (down 40 points). In contrast, more Ukrainians in the East (63%) are now advocating for an immediate peace settlement over continuing the war (27%).

Willingness to Concede Territory for Peace

As Ukrainians lean toward a negotiated peace, a significant portion of the population is also willing to consider territorial concessions in exchange for an end to the war. Among those supporting negotiations, 52% believe that Ukraine should be open to ceding some of its territory as part of a peace agreement. However, 38% disagree, and 10% remain uncertain about this potential compromise.

Interestingly, even many Ukrainians who continue to support the fight for full victory are beginning to reconsider what “victory” truly means. In 2022 and 2023, nearly all of those who wanted to keep fighting believed “victory” meant regaining all lost territories, including Crimea. By 2024, this view has slightly shifted, with 81% still hoping for complete territorial recovery, a drop from previous years.

Who Should Lead Peace Negotiations?

In the context of peace negotiations, Ukrainians have clear preferences regarding international involvement. 70% of Ukrainians favor the European Union (EU) playing a significant role in peace talks, followed by the United Kingdom at 63%. In comparison, only half of Ukrainians see the U.S. as a key player in these discussions, regardless of whether Donald Trump or Kamala Harris is in power.

This suggests a preference for European-led solutions, reflecting Ukraine’s geographical and political ties to the EU and its members. Many Ukrainians believe that their interests will be best protected through the involvement of these key international partners.

The Future of the War: A Question of Resolve and Strategy

Despite the growing support for a negotiated peace, the conflict is far from over. Russia continues to make inroads on the battlefield, and Ukraine’s military strategy remains under intense scrutiny. As the war enters a critical phase, the international landscape is shifting, especially with the upcoming U.S. elections, which could influence future military and financial support for Ukraine.

In September 2024, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy expressed optimism that the war could be nearing its end. Many Ukrainians may hope that his prediction holds true, and that the long-awaited peace agreement is on the horizon.

May you also like it:

War Speeches and Russia’s Lies About Ukraine, NATO, and Negotiations in January

IRI Ukraine Poll: Majorities Believe in Defeating Russia, Support Recapturing Lost Territory

Diplomacy Watch: Ukrainian Public Opinion More Divided Than Ever

Conclusion

As the war continues to drain resources and lives, Ukrainian public opinion has evolved. While many still support the fight for full territorial recovery, an increasing number are advocating for a swift negotiated peace. The prospect of territorial concessions is now on the table for some Ukrainians, further complicating the political landscape.

The future of Ukraine’s conflict with Russia depends on both domestic public sentiment and international diplomatic efforts. With war fatigue growing and international dynamics shifting, the path to peace could become more achievable—if both sides are willing to make compromises.

FAQs:

Why have Ukrainians shifted toward supporting peace negotiations?
War fatigue, economic strain, and the ongoing human toll have led many Ukrainians to favor a quicker end to the war, even if it means making territorial concessions.

What is the current public opinion on continuing the war?
As of 2024, 38% of Ukrainians support continuing the war for full victory, while 52% favor a quick, negotiated peace.

Would Ukrainians be willing to give up territory for peace?
Yes, 52% of Ukrainians supporting a negotiated peace are open to the idea of making some territorial concessions to end the war.

Which foreign countries do Ukrainians want to lead peace talks?
Ukrainians overwhelmingly favor the EU (70%) and the UK (63%) to play leading roles in peace negotiations, rather than the U.S.

What does “victory” mean to Ukrainians in 2024?
While most Ukrainians still desire to regain all lost territory, including Crimea, the percentage of people holding this view has dropped slightly to 81% in 2024.

What could the future hold for Ukraine’s conflict with Russia?
The outcome of the war will depend on both military strategies on the front lines and diplomatic negotiations involving key international players.

War Speeches. Negotiations, War with NATO and the “Absence” of Ukraine: What Did Russia Lie About in January
January 2024 was dominated by a wave of Russian information operations. The Kremlin leveraged all available media channels to sow division between the Ukrainian people and their government, while simultaneously denying the existence of a distinct Ukrainian identity. Russia also feigned interest in negotiations, hoping to buy time and divert global attention from the ongoing war in Ukraine. However, the increasingly aggressive actions and rhetoric of Russian ultra-nationalists pushed Europe to seriously contemplate the threat of direct military confrontation with the Russian Federation.

A key objective of Russia’s disinformation campaign has been to undermine Western support for Ukraine. Moscow attempts to discredit Ukraine’s political and military leadership, manipulating sensitive topics to deflect attention from its own war crimes, destabilize the situation in Ukraine, and erode international support.

The following sections delve into the context and purpose behind some of the prominent Russian narratives that emerged in January.

Key Lies in Russia’s War Speeches: Fact vs. Fiction

Russia has used war speeches to justify its actions and position in the ongoing conflict. However, many of these claims have been challenged by experts, officials, and global organizations. Let’s break down some of the most significant falsehoods:

1. Ukraine’s “Absence” in Negotiations

Russian officials have repeatedly claimed that Ukraine has refused to engage in meaningful negotiations. In January, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s statements implied that Ukraine’s government was unwilling to sit at the table for peace talks. However, this narrative ignores the fact that Ukraine has consistently called for Russian withdrawal from its territory as a precondition for any negotiations.

• Fact: Ukraine has shown willingness to negotiate, but only under terms that guarantee its sovereignty.
• Misleading Claim: Russia paints Ukraine as uninterested in peace talks, a narrative that plays into the justification for continued aggression.

2. NATO’s Role in the Conflict

Another key element of Russia’s speeches is the blame placed on NATO for the conflict’s escalation. Russian officials often argue that NATO’s expansion threatens Russia’s security, and this is cited as a reason for the invasion of Ukraine. In January, Russia again claimed that NATO is directly involved in the war, despite clear evidence that NATO countries are providing support to Ukraine, but not directly engaging in combat.

• Fact: NATO has offered military and humanitarian support to Ukraine but has not directly intervened in the conflict.
• Misleading Claim: Russia implies that NATO is actively fighting alongside Ukraine, which is a distortion of reality.

3. Ukraine’s Military “Absurdities”

In his speeches, Putin has described Ukraine’s military as ineffective and disorganized, often making false claims about its inability to defend itself. These assertions are part of Russia’s broader strategy to portray Ukraine as a weak and unstable state. However, the Ukrainian military has proven to be highly resilient, managing significant counterattacks and regaining territory from Russian forces.

• Fact: Ukraine’s military, with training and equipment support from Western allies, has achieved significant battlefield successes.
• Misleading Claim: Russia attempts to undermine Ukraine’s military capabilities, which only fuels propaganda supporting their continued war efforts.

4. Claims About Civilians in Ukraine

Russia has also made statements about the alleged treatment of civilians in Ukraine, suggesting that Ukraine is using civilians as human shields or is otherwise causing harm to its own people. These false claims ignore the documented war crimes committed by Russian forces, including the targeting of civilian areas and atrocities in places like Bucha and Mariupol.

• Fact: Multiple international organizations have condemned Russian actions as war crimes.
• Misleading Claim: Russia attempts to deflect blame for civilian casualties by accusing Ukraine of similar tactics.

Implications of Russia’s Lies: A Global Perspective

These false narratives and misrepresentations not only affect the Ukrainian people but also have serious repercussions for global diplomacy. The spreading of lies serves several strategic purposes:

• Justifying Aggression: By distorting the facts, Russia seeks to legitimize its actions in the eyes of its domestic audience and global sympathizers.
• Disrupting Peace Talks: Misinformation makes it harder for peace talks to progress, as distrust and misinformation cloud any potential resolution.
• Polarizing Public Opinion: False claims influence global public opinion, sometimes turning countries that would otherwise support Ukraine into more neutral or antagonistic actors.

These tactics are designed to slow international pressure on Russia and extend the war, while also undermining Ukraine’s position.

May you also like it:

Diplomacy Watch: Ukrainian Public Opinion More Divided Than Ever

Ukrainian Public Opinion on Compromise with Russia Changing, Researcher Explains

Ukrainian Opinion Survey Tracks Fluctuating Views on Quick End to War

Conclusion

Russia’s speeches in January 2025 are filled with distortions meant to mislead and confuse. Understanding these falsehoods is essential for governments, diplomats, and the global public to respond effectively. For Ukraine, countering these lies is crucial in protecting its sovereignty and pushing for genuine peace talks. The international community must continue to debunk Russian misinformation and support Ukraine’s right to self-defense and a negotiated resolution that respects its territorial integrity.

FAQs:

What false claim did Russia make about Ukraine’s negotiations?
Russia falsely claimed that Ukraine was unwilling to engage in peace talks, despite Ukraine’s conditional willingness.

Is NATO directly involved in the war in Ukraine?
No, NATO provides support to Ukraine but has not participated directly in military combat.

What does Russia say about Ukraine’s military?
Russia claims Ukraine’s military is weak and ineffective, though Ukraine has achieved significant military successes.

How does Russia misrepresent civilian casualties in Ukraine?
Russia accuses Ukraine of harming its own civilians, deflecting attention from its own war crimes.

What is the impact of Russia’s lies on global diplomacy?
Russia’s false narratives disrupt peace efforts, justify continued aggression, and polarize international opinion.

What should the international community do in response?
The international community must actively debunk Russian misinformation and continue supporting Ukraine’s right to peace and sovereignty.