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.

Ukrainian Opinion Survey Tracks Fluctuating Views on Quick End to War A recent public opinion survey in Ukraine reveals a significant shift, with a slight majority of Ukrainians now saying they would be willing to concede territory in exchange for peace. However, other recent polls suggest that the issue is far more complex.

The Gallup poll, conducted in August and October, shows that 52% of Ukrainians favor negotiating a quick end to the war, while 38% want to continue fighting until victory is achieved. While some media outlets have framed this as a shift in public sentiment since the war’s early days, other surveys suggest that support for a swift resolution is not as widespread.

For example, a survey conducted by the International Republican Institute’s (IRI) Center for Insights in Survey Research (CISR) in September and October found that strong majorities of Ukrainians remain confident about the country’s ability to defeat Russia. The survey also found that Ukrainians overwhelmingly support recapturing all lost territories.

According to this survey, released on November 12 and based on interviews conducted in Kyiv-controlled areas in late September and early October, 88% of Ukrainians are optimistic about Ukraine’s chances of winning the war. Although this figure is lower than the 98% who believed in victory in June 2022, it has remained steady since February 2024.

Ukrainian polling organizations have echoed similar findings. A study from the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) in September-October 2024 reported that 81% of Ukrainians believe victory is possible, provided the West continues to offer support. Only 14% view Russia as too strong, up from 7% in December 2023.

Furthermore, a national survey from the Ilko Kucheriv Foundation “Democratic Initiatives,” in collaboration with the Razumkov Center, found that Ukrainians are largely opposed to surrendering territory to Russia. Only 9% of Ukrainians said they would accept recognizing occupied territories as part of Russia in exchange for peace, an increase from 5% in August 2023. On the other hand, 81% still consider such a concession unacceptable, though this number has decreased from 90% in August 2023.

Pollsters attribute the differences in the findings to variations in survey methodologies.

Key Findings from the Survey:

A recent survey conducted by independent polling agencies has provided important insights into how Ukrainian citizens feel about the ongoing conflict. According to the results, there is a notable fluctuation in the desire for an immediate end to the war, influenced by various political, economic, and emotional factors.

Fluctuating Support for a Quick End: The percentage of Ukrainians supporting a swift conclusion to the war has varied over time. In the early stages of the conflict, there was a broad consensus in favor of a quick resolution to end the suffering. However, as the war has dragged on, opinions have become more divided. Some Ukrainians argue for a quicker peace deal to mitigate civilian losses, while others advocate for the continuation of the fight to reclaim occupied territories.

Influence of Military Success: As the Ukrainian military has gained ground in certain regions, public opinion has shifted toward a longer-term commitment to securing victory. In fact, a recent poll found that 45% of Ukrainians now prioritize reclaiming all occupied territories over an immediate peace agreement.

Economic Impact: The economic toll of the war is also a key factor. While the Ukrainian economy has shown resilience, the ongoing conflict has led to inflation, job losses, and financial instability. In some regions, economic hardship has fueled a desire for a faster resolution to restore normalcy.

Factors Influencing Public Opinion:

Several key factors play a role in shaping the fluctuating opinions of the Ukrainian population:

War Fatigue: The psychological and emotional toll on the population has contributed to a growing desire for peace, particularly among families who have lost loved ones or suffered from displacement.

International Support: The level of foreign aid and support from Western nations, such as the U.S. and European Union, has influenced public sentiment. Increased military and financial assistance has emboldened citizens to continue the fight.

Regional Divisions: Opinions on the war vary significantly by region. Eastern Ukraine, which has seen the most destruction, tends to have a higher percentage of people favoring a swift end to the conflict. In contrast, western regions, where anti-Russian sentiment is stronger, show greater support for continued resistance.

The Public’s Struggle Between Peace and Persistence: Ukrainians face a difficult choice between peace and perseverance. On one hand, the horrors of war — including civilian casualties, infrastructural damage, and displacement — push many towards supporting a peaceful resolution. On the other hand, the sense of national pride and the desire for justice compel others to fight on until all Ukrainian land is restored.

Recent Trends in Ukrainian Opinion: Data from recent months indicates that the public’s opinion is fluid and often changes in response to significant military developments. The government’s military achievements on the frontlines have reinforced public support for continued resistance, yet the emotional cost of war keeps the debate on a swift end alive.

Key Statistics:

• A 2024 survey showed that 52% of Ukrainians support continuing the war until all occupied territories are regained, while 39% favor a quicker peace agreement.
• Economic hardships linked to the conflict have been a major driver in changing opinions, with 63% of Ukrainians expressing concern about inflation and unemployment.

Conclusion:

The fluctuating public opinion in Ukraine reflects the complexity of the war and the deep emotional, political, and economic struggles faced by the nation. As the situation evolves, it is clear that Ukrainian citizens are caught between their desire for peace and their resolve to see the war through until a decisive victory. Understanding these shifting perspectives is essential for anyone analyzing the path toward a resolution and the future of Ukraine.

FAQs:

1. Why are Ukrainian opinions on ending the war so divided?

The division stems from the emotional cost of the war, economic challenges, and varying regional experiences with the conflict.

2. How has the war’s duration affected Ukrainian opinion?

As the war has stretched on, more Ukrainians support continuing the fight, particularly after military successes and external aid.

3. What role does international support play in Ukrainian opinions?

Western military and financial support boosts confidence in continuing the fight, affecting public sentiment.

4. What economic effects are influencing public opinion?

Inflation, unemployment, and financial instability have led some Ukrainians to favor a quicker peace settlement to end economic hardships.

5. How does regional sentiment differ in Ukraine?

Eastern Ukraine tends to favor a quick peace due to the direct impact of the war, while western regions lean more towards continued resistance.

6. Can Ukrainian opinion on the war change over time?

Yes, public opinion fluctuates in response to military developments, economic conditions, and political events.

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.

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.

Russia Increases War Budget as Ukraine Plans to Ramp Up Arms Production Last week, from September 25 to October 1, Ukraine unveiled its initiative to form the Defense Industries Alliance, aimed at bolstering weapons production. Meanwhile, Russia continues to pursue its imperial ambitions, threatening to expand its territory, with plans to allocate over a third of its federal budget to fund the ongoing war.

Despite a mounting national debt, Russia has managed to sustain its war efforts by circumventing sanctions through third-party companies that facilitate the import of military goods. While Ukraine’s allies are working to prevent these workarounds, enforcement of sanctions against Russia demands greater attention and the development of strategies to tighten restrictions long-term.

In an effort to strengthen its defense, Ukraine has also focused on enhancing air defense capabilities. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg made a surprise visit to Kyiv on September 28, where he met with President Volodymyr Zelensky to discuss Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration and the provision of military support, including air defense systems in anticipation of Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

Russia’s Increased War Budget: A Sign of Long-Term Commitment

Russia’s decision to boost its war budget demonstrates its determination to continue fighting despite international sanctions and internal economic pressures. The Russian government has allocated additional funds for military operations, which is likely to extend the duration of the conflict. In recent years, Russia has faced increasing economic strain, but President Vladimir Putin’s government has prioritized defense spending to support its military agenda.

• Russian War Budget Increase: The Russian government has increased its military expenditure by a significant margin, signaling its commitment to the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
• Impact on Russia’s Economy: While this increase in military spending may bolster the war effort, it comes at a cost to Russia’s domestic economy, potentially diverting funds from critical infrastructure and public services.

This increase in military spending reflects Russia’s strategy of outlasting Ukraine’s resources and continuing to press on with its military campaign.

Ukraine’s Strategic Focus on Arms Production

On the other side of the conflict, Ukraine is not only focusing on defense but is also ramping up its arms production to meet the growing demand for weapons and ammunition. The Ukrainian government has made clear its intent to secure the resources needed to continue the fight, especially as it faces a well-funded adversary. This ramp-up in production is critical for maintaining momentum in the war and ensuring that Ukrainian forces remain well-equipped.

• Ukraine’s Production Plans: Ukraine is expanding its domestic arms manufacturing capabilities, focusing on artillery, ammunition, and other critical supplies.
• Self-Sufficiency in Arms: By increasing arms production, Ukraine aims to reduce reliance on foreign aid, giving it more control over its military readiness and response times.

This focus on arms production is essential as Ukraine seeks to maintain a sustainable defense capability, particularly in the face of an increasingly well-funded Russian military.

Economic and Strategic Implications for Both Nations

The increased war budgets for Russia and Ukraine have significant economic and strategic implications. For Russia, the additional spending is a clear indication that it is prepared for a prolonged war, but it risks further economic instability as resources are reallocated to defense. Ukraine, on the other hand, is making critical investments to ensure it can sustain its resistance efforts. By ramping up arms production, Ukraine aims to be less dependent on external arms suppliers, which can be crucial in times of global supply chain disruption.

Key Implications:

• Russia’s Economic Strain: Increased military spending could lead to further economic instability, impacting Russia’s long-term sustainability.
• Ukraine’s Self-Reliance: By enhancing arms production, Ukraine increases its ability to defend itself independently while reducing reliance on Western aid.
• Global Impact: The focus on ramping up production and increasing military budgets by both countries could have broader implications for global security and the arms industry.

The Future of the Conflict: A Prolonged Standoff?

With both Russia and Ukraine making significant adjustments to their war strategies, the future of the conflict remains uncertain. Increased military spending by Russia could prolong the war, while Ukraine’s focus on arms production is a clear sign that it intends to continue resisting as long as necessary. As the conflict continues, global powers may be forced to make difficult decisions about their role in providing support or negotiating a resolution.

Key Considerations:

• Prolonged Conflict: If both nations continue their current military trajectories, the conflict could drag on, resulting in even more destruction and loss of life.
• Diplomatic Pressures: As both countries ramp up military spending, diplomatic efforts to mediate peace may become more complex, as both sides grow more entrenched in their positions.

May you also like it:

Half of Ukrainians Want Quick, Negotiated End to War

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

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

Conclusion

As Russia increases its war budget and Ukraine ramps up arms production, both nations are preparing for a long and difficult conflict. These changes reflect the increasing militarization of the war and highlight the strategic moves each side is making to ensure continued viability in the face of ongoing challenges. The global community will need to carefully monitor these developments, as they could have profound implications for the conflict’s duration and the broader geopolitical landscape.

FAQs:

Why has Russia increased its war budget?
Russia has increased its war budget to sustain its military operations in Ukraine, signaling a commitment to prolonging the conflict.

How is Ukraine responding to the increased Russian war budget?
Ukraine is ramping up its arms production to reduce reliance on foreign aid and maintain its defense capabilities against Russia.

What are the economic implications for Russia?
The increased military spending could lead to economic instability in Russia, as resources are diverted from domestic needs to support the war effort.

How will Ukraine’s arms production help in the war?
By ramping up arms production, Ukraine can maintain its defense efforts, ensuring it is less reliant on external military supplies.

What could this mean for the duration of the war?
The increased spending by both Russia and Ukraine suggests the war could become a prolonged conflict, with both sides preparing for a long-term standoff.

How might the global community react to these developments?
The global community will likely face pressure to mediate peace talks, as escalating military commitments could lead to further instability in the region.

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.

Public Views on Ukraine and U.S. Involvement in Russia-Ukraine War The Russia-Ukraine war has created a deeply divided global landscape, with public opinion varying greatly about the role of the United States in supporting Ukraine. While many Americans view the conflict as a critical geopolitical challenge, there are significant differences in how the U.S. should engage. With the war entering its third year, what do the latest polls tell us about how the U.S. public views the situation in Ukraine? And how do those opinions influence U.S. involvement moving forward?

U.S. Views on Support for Ukraine

Approximately 31% of Americans now believe the U.S. is providing too much support to Ukraine, a significant increase from just 7% in March 2022, right after Russia’s invasion. Meanwhile, 25% feel the support is just right, and 24% think it’s insufficient. Around 18% of Americans remain unsure.

In March 2022, nearly 42% of Americans thought the U.S. wasn’t doing enough to help Ukraine, a view that has since dropped by nearly 20 percentage points. The shift reflects growing concerns over the extent of U.S. involvement, as more people now question the level of support being offered.

Partisan Differences on U.S. Support for Ukraine

The partisan divide is evident. Half of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (49%) believe the U.S. is giving too much aid to Ukraine, compared to only 16% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning individuals. In contrast, 36% of Democrats now think the U.S. isn’t providing enough support—an increase from 24% in November 2023.

Among Republicans, conservative Republicans are more likely to oppose Ukraine aid (54%) than moderate or liberal Republicans (40%). Similarly, liberal Democrats (11%) are less likely to think the U.S. is providing too much assistance compared to conservative and moderate Democrats (54%).

Younger Americans from both parties are also more likely to say that the U.S. is providing excessive support and to express uncertainty on the matter.

Concerns About Russia’s Expansion and Ukraine’s Future

Concerns over Russia’s potential to defeat Ukraine have been rising, with 44% of Americans extremely or very concerned about a Russian victory and takeover of Ukraine. This marks a 6% increase since September 2022 but remains below the 55% who held similar concerns in April 2022. The rise in worry is especially notable among Democrats, where 55% express strong concern, up by 10 percentage points since the previous year.

Republicans show less concern, with only 35% deeply worried about a Russian victory. Liberals are notably more concerned than conservatives and moderates on both sides of the political spectrum.

Worries About Russia Invading Other Countries

Americans are also more concerned about the possibility of Russia invading additional countries in the region. 48% of Americans now express extreme concern about this threat, an increase from 41% in September 2022. However, this is still lower than the 59% who were concerned early in the war, in April 2022.

The concern is especially high among liberal Democrats, with 58% extremely or very worried, compared to 41% of conservative Republicans. Additionally, older Americans (ages 65 and older) are more likely to be alarmed by Russia’s potential actions, with 61% expressing deep concern, compared to 41% of younger adults under 30.

U.S. Support for Ukraine: A Divided Landscape

As of early 2024, surveys show that Americans remain divided in their support for Ukraine, despite overwhelming international sympathy for Ukraine’s sovereignty. According to a recent University of Maryland poll, 62% of Americans expressed sympathy for Ukraine, with an even higher number of Democrats supporting Ukrainian resilience against Russian aggression. However, partisan differences are evident. While 76% of Democrats sympathize with Ukraine, only 58% of Republicans share the same sentiment. In contrast, just 2% of Americans reported sympathy for Russia in this conflict.

Increased U.S. Support for Ukraine: A Growing Trend

Over the course of the war, U.S. public opinion has shown a shift in favor of continued support for Ukraine. While early opinions were mixed, 48% of Americans now favor long-term U.S. support for Ukraine, according to the latest polling from the University of Maryland’s Critical Issues Poll. This figure includes 37% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats, highlighting the increasing bipartisan consensus. Despite political polarization at home, U.S. support for Ukraine has strengthened, with a growing belief that U.S. assistance is crucial in preventing further Russian advances in the region.

Challenges to U.S. Support: Partisan Divides and Election Politics

While many Americans favor continued support for Ukraine, partisan divides remain a significant factor in shaping views of U.S. involvement. As the U.S. heads into the 2024 election cycle, Republican candidates have voiced opposition to additional military aid for Ukraine, with figures like Donald Trump proposing that the U.S. should focus on domestic issues rather than engaging in foreign conflicts. This political shift has led to Republicans’ decreased support for U.S. involvement, particularly regarding financial aid and military assistance to Ukraine.

On the other hand, Democrats have largely remained firm in their support for Ukraine’s sovereignty, arguing that the U.S. should remain a strong ally in the face of Russian aggression. The contrast in party lines reveals a tension that may play a significant role in shaping U.S. foreign policy toward Ukraine in the near future.

Ukrainian Public Sentiment: Optimism Amid Adversity

While U.S. public opinion fluctuates, Ukrainians remain resolute and optimistic about their future. Despite Russia’s territorial gains, 58% of Ukrainians believe Ukraine will eventually win the war, bolstered by continued support from Western countries. Ukrainian morale remains strong, especially with increased military aid. If Western weapons and ammunition supplies increase, 69% of Ukrainians believe they can achieve victory over Russia.

In addition to military aid, Ukrainians view membership in the European Union (EU) and NATO as key to securing lasting peace and prosperity. For many Ukrainians, NATO and EU membership are not just political goals—they represent international recognition of Ukraine’s struggles and sacrifices.

May you also like it:

The Meaning of Sovereignty: Ukrainian and European views of Russia’s War on Ukraine

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

Conclusion

While American and Ukrainian public opinions on the Russia-Ukraine war diverge in terms of objectives and desired outcomes, both publics share common ground in their desire for a resolution that favors Ukraine’s sovereignty and stability. Bipartisan support in the U.S. for continued assistance has grown, but political divides—especially in the Republican camp—could present obstacles to future U.S. involvement.

For U.S. policymakers, understanding these differences is key. As Ukrainian resilience continues to inspire, the question remains: How can the U.S. continue to support Ukraine while balancing domestic concerns and international pressures?

FAQs:

What is the current level of U.S. support for Ukraine?

48% of Americans support long-term U.S. involvement in Ukraine, including military aid and diplomatic efforts.

Are Americans divided on supporting Ukraine?

Yes, Republicans and Democrats show notable differences in their support, with Democrats generally more supportive of Ukraine.

How does the U.S. view Russia’s role in the war?

The majority of Americans sympathize more with Ukraine than with Russia, reflecting a broad consensus against Russian aggression.

What role does the U.S. play in Ukraine’s military efforts?

The U.S. provides military aid, ammunition, and economic support to Ukraine, contributing significantly to the war effort.

Do Ukrainians want NATO membership?

Yes, NATO membership is viewed by most Ukrainians as a necessary step toward securing peace and recognizing their sacrifices.

What challenges does the U.S. face in supporting Ukraine?

Partisan divides, the election season, and domestic political concerns complicate U.S. policy on supporting Ukraine.

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.

Ukrainian Public Opinion on Compromise with Russia Changing, Researcher Explains Two years and seven months into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, public sentiment in Ukraine is gradually shifting regarding the prospect of ending the conflict.

Gerard Toal, an international affairs expert at Virginia Tech, has spent over a decade studying Ukrainian public opinion. His latest research reveals a growing openness among Ukrainians toward negotiating with Russia.

“This shift comes from a place of hardship, not peace,” Toal explains. “Ukrainians do not want to lose, and they don’t want to concede territory to Russia. However, an increasing number, though still not a majority, are acknowledging that some concessions might be necessary to bring the war to an end.”

Toal discusses the evolution of public opinion and what the future might hold for Ukraine in this context.

How Has Ukrainian Public Opinion Changed Over Time?

Toal notes, “We’ve been tracking public opinion in Ukraine for years. After Russia’s invasion in February 2022, there was initially some openness to negotiations. But the discovery of war crimes in Bucha and Irpin in April 2022 hardened those views. Despite that, the war’s prolonged suffering has led to a shift. More Ukrainians are now expressing support for a ceasefire and settlement, even if that involves territorial losses.”

What Challenges Did You Face in Conducting These Surveys?

“Surveying public opinion in wartime is extremely challenging,” Toal explains. “Our Ukrainian research partner faced significant obstacles, including difficulties reaching people, reluctance to speak, and unreliable power supplies. The results we have offer a snapshot of public sentiment, but they don’t capture the full complexity. Many voices are likely missing—people without phones, those hesitant to talk to strangers about the war, or those who simply don’t feel comfortable sharing their true opinions. These factors must be considered.”

What Are the Main Causes Behind the Shifts in Public Opinion?

Toal attributes the shifts in sentiment to “the cumulative human and material toll of the war.” Additionally, he points to the blockage of U.S. aid by the U.S. House of Representatives, which acted as a wake-up call for many Ukrainians. “This led to the realization that international support might not always be guaranteed. Ukrainians didn’t choose this war—it was forced upon them.”

The Changing Landscape of Ukrainian Public Opinion

Historically, Ukrainians have been highly resistant to any form of compromise with Russia due to Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine. According to recent surveys, however, this steadfast stance is now undergoing noticeable changes.

Key Factors Behind the Shift:

1. War Fatigue: After nearly a decade of conflict, war fatigue has set in. Economic strain, along with the physical and emotional toll of the war, has led some Ukrainians to reconsider the long-term viability of continuing the fight without a diplomatic resolution.
2. Casualty Numbers: High casualties, particularly among civilians, have caused many to question the effectiveness of ongoing military operations. According to the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, over 60,000 Ukrainian soldiers have died since the beginning of the 2022 invasion, contributing to a shift in public sentiment.
3. Economic Impact: The war has severely impacted Ukraine’s economy, with GDP expected to shrink by 30% in 2025. This economic strain forces many to rethink the costs of prolonged conflict and the potential benefits of negotiating peace.

Research Insights into the Changing Mindset

Experts from institutions like the Ukrainian Institute of Strategic Studies and the Razumkov Center have pointed out that younger generations, who didn’t live through the Soviet era, tend to support negotiations more than their older counterparts. This generational divide highlights the evolving national identity and the shifting priorities of Ukraine’s younger population.

Public Opinion: What Ukrainians Really Think About Compromise

Several surveys conducted in 2024 revealed that nearly 45% of Ukrainians now believe that some form of negotiation with Russia might be necessary to end the war. This is a significant shift from just two years ago when only 25% of the population was open to discussions with Moscow.

Breakdown of Opinions:

• 45% Support Negotiation: The group that now sees a need for some form of dialogue is primarily driven by economic hardships and civilian losses.
• 38% Remain Opposed: Many older citizens and those living in conflict zones still firmly believe in military victory over any form of concession to Russia.
• 17% Undecided: These individuals are uncertain, swayed by current developments and unclear outcomes.

What This Means for Ukraine’s Future

This change in public opinion has profound implications for Ukraine’s strategy moving forward. Researchers warn that the shift towards compromise could be a double-edged sword. On one hand, negotiations might lead to a peaceful resolution and an end to the devastation. On the other hand, giving in to Russian demands might be seen as a betrayal of Ukrainian sovereignty and democracy, risking future political instability.

Conclusion

As Ukrainian public opinion on negotiating with Russia continues to evolve, the country faces crucial decisions about its future direction. While some may view compromise as necessary for peace, others remain committed to the fight for full territorial integrity and sovereignty. Ultimately, the resolution will depend not only on the will of the people but also on the international community’s support and the ongoing realities on the battlefield.

FAQs:

Why is Ukrainian public opinion shifting towards compromise?
Economic strain, high casualties, and war fatigue are leading many Ukrainians to reconsider the costs of continuing the conflict.

How many Ukrainians support negotiating with Russia in 2024?
Around 45% of Ukrainians now support some form of negotiation, up from 25% in 2022.

What role do younger Ukrainians play in this shift?
Younger Ukrainians, who didn’t experience Soviet rule, are more likely to support negotiations with Russia.

What is the impact of the war on Ukraine’s economy?
Ukraine’s GDP is expected to shrink by 30% in 2025 due to the ongoing conflict.

What are the risks of compromising with Russia?
There is a risk that compromise could be seen as undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty and lead to political instability.

What is the outlook for Ukraine’s future negotiations?
The future of negotiations will depend on the balance between military outcomes and public sentiment, as well as international support.

War Speeches: Diplomatic and Political Implications of Russia’s War Against Ukraine in October October 2023 was a month marked by significant geopolitical shifts and foreign policy developments that could reshape the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Key events, such as a divided U.S. stance on further military aid to Ukraine, the rise of a pro-Russian government in Slovakia, Hungary’s continued pro-Kremlin alignment, and rising tensions in the Middle East, all point to a complex, evolving landscape that could influence the trajectory of the war.

However, despite these challenges, Ukraine’s military support remains steadfast, with a particular focus on bolstering air defense to protect critical energy infrastructure. Ukraine is also doubling down on efforts to bring about a just resolution to the war, continuing to promote its “peace formula.”

On the Russian side, there is no indication of a willingness to halt the invasion, as Moscow pushes forward with territorial expansion and attempts to reduce international backing for Ukraine. The Kremlin is betting on a prolonged conflict, exploiting global instability and Western fatigue over the war. This strategy aims to pressure the international community into decisive action to end what is seen as a major source of global instability.

In preparation for what is anticipated to be the “worst winter in history,” Ukraine is ramping up its defensive measures, particularly in the energy sector, while continuing to advocate for a global peace settlement. The latest developments signal a complex diplomatic battle, with significant implications for both the ongoing war and broader international relations.

The Power of War Speeches in Shaping International Diplomacy

Speeches by political leaders during wartime can be powerful tools, influencing both domestic and international audiences. In the case of Russia’s war against Ukraine, speeches serve multiple purposes:

• Justifying military actions: Leaders frame the war as a necessary defense of national security or a battle against perceived threats.
• Building morale: War speeches often aim to unite citizens under the banner of patriotism and national pride, increasing domestic support for the government.
• Shaping public perception: Through selective messaging, leaders seek to control how both their citizens and the international community perceive the conflict.

Russia’s War Rhetoric: A Tool for Maintaining Control

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s speeches have been central to maintaining domestic support for the war. In his addresses, Putin often frames the conflict as a defensive struggle against a Western-imposed “Nazi” regime, casting Ukraine as a pawn in a larger geopolitical battle. By invoking historical references and portraying the West as an existential threat to Russian sovereignty, Putin aims to solidify nationalist sentiment and justify aggressive military actions.

In his most recent speech in late September 2025, Putin reinforced Russia’s intent to expand territorial claims, even as international sanctions and diplomatic isolation mounted. His rhetoric suggests that Russia will not back down, positioning the war as an enduring effort to “protect Russian interests” while refusing to engage in peace talks that would require significant concessions.

Ukraine’s Strategic Use of War Speeches for International Support

On the other side, Ukraine’s leadership, particularly President Volodymyr Zelensky, uses speeches to rally both domestic and international support. Zelensky’s addresses often highlight the human toll of the war, portraying Ukraine as the victim of an unprovoked aggression, while emphasizing Ukraine’s resilience. By appealing to shared values such as democracy and freedom, Zelensky effectively garners international solidarity.

Furthermore, speeches by Ukrainian leaders serve as a call to action for the West, urging continued military assistance, economic support, and sanctions against Russia. For instance, Zelensky’s speech in October 2025 emphasized the need for increased air defense systems in preparation for anticipated Russian strikes against Ukrainian energy infrastructure.

The Role of Diplomatic Speech in Shaping Global Alliances

War speeches are not only directed at domestic audiences but also at foreign governments and international organizations. For instance, the statements made by leaders of NATO countries following their meetings with Ukrainian officials directly influence the diplomatic landscape. NATO’s public endorsement of Ukraine’s future membership, alongside pledges of continued military aid, plays a pivotal role in both deterring Russian aggression and bolstering Ukraine’s defense capabilities.

Speeches by leaders in the EU, the US, and other global powers also shape how sanctions are enforced and how international law is applied to Russia’s actions. The diplomatic impact of these speeches cannot be underestimated, as they influence everything from military support to economic measures aimed at undermining Russia’s ability to sustain the war.

Key Political Implications of War Speeches

The diplomatic and political fallout of war speeches is vast. Here are some key political implications:

• Influencing Sanctions: Political rhetoric often guides the imposition or tightening of sanctions on Russia, especially when leaders call attention to Russia’s violations of international law.
• Shifting Global Alliances: Countries are compelled to publicly align themselves with either Russia or Ukraine, depending on their strategic interests. War speeches are a major factor in these decisions.
• Impact on Military Aid: Speeches by Ukraine’s leaders play a crucial role in securing military aid from the West, with military support often directly tied to the rhetoric that frames the war as a fight for democratic values.

May you also like it:

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

Diplomacy Watch: Ukrainian Public Opinion More Divided Than Ever

Ukrainian Opinion Survey Tracks Fluctuating Views on Quick End to War

Conclusion

War speeches are much more than political tools; they are key elements that shape the course of international diplomacy. As Russia’s war against Ukraine continues to evolve, the rhetoric of political leaders will remain a central aspect of the conflict, guiding global responses, shaping alliances, and influencing the future of international relations. Whether used to justify aggression or rally support for defense, speeches will continue to play a critical role in the geopolitical dynamics of the ongoing war.

FAQs

1. How do speeches influence international diplomacy in the Russia-Ukraine conflict?
Speeches by both Russian and Ukrainian leaders frame the narrative of the war, influencing international support, sanctions, and military aid.

2. What role does Russian propaganda play in war speeches?
Russian war speeches often use propaganda to justify aggression, portray Ukraine as a threat, and rally domestic support for continued military operations.

3. How do Ukrainian speeches rally international support?
Ukraine’s leaders, particularly Zelensky, use speeches to highlight the humanitarian crisis, appeal for military aid, and emphasize democratic values.

4. What impact do speeches have on global sanctions against Russia?
Speeches by global leaders influence the imposition of sanctions by drawing attention to Russia’s violations of international law and urging economic pressure.

5. How do war speeches affect military aid to Ukraine?
Ukraine’s speeches are directly tied to securing military aid, with appeals for specific weapons systems and support often following key addresses.

6. Can war speeches alter the course of the conflict?
While speeches may not directly change military strategies, they significantly impact diplomatic efforts, public support, and the strategic decisions of global powers.