As Washington shifts the Ukraine burden to Europe, Andrey Sushentsov examines the EU\u2019s strategic limits and its costly confrontation with Russia<\/p>\n
Andrey Sushentsov, dean of the Faculty of International Relations at MGIMO and a member of the Scientific-Expert Council under the Security Council of the Russian Federation, discusses why Western Europe is so afraid of a direct confrontation with Russia, how the US is shifting the burden of the Ukraine crisis onto the EU, why the \u201cpyramid of trust\u201d surrounding Kiev is crumbling, and when the Ukraine conflict might come to an end.
\nHis interview, first published in Russian by TASS, was translated and edited by the RT team.
\nAmerica sails away, Europe gets the bill
\nEvgeny Kuznetsov: You have noted that the US is seeking to extricate itself from the Ukraine crisis by shifting the burden onto Western Europe. If Washington does indeed distance itself, are these Europeans prepared, politically and economically, to assume the role of Ukraine\u2019s principal \u201csecurity guarantor\u201d?<\/p>\n
Read more<\/p>\n
Trump has made a deal with Moscow, but Zelensky has other ideas<\/p>\n
Andrey Sushentsov: The US strategy in the Ukrainian crisis initially reflected its archetype as a maritime power employing a \u201ccontinental sword\u201d in its confrontation with a major continental power. This involves a neighboring country with military resources, which the maritime power supports in order to weaken its rival.
\nUkraine was well suited to this role, as a large state with substantial armed forces, motivated to confront Russia. But the limitation of such a strategy is that you can\u2019t fully control the behavior of the \u201csword.\u201d\u00a0Nor is it entirely resource-efficient, there\u2019s a limit to the resources that can be allocated to it, and if no turning point is reached in the confrontation, further support yields no additional gains in effectiveness.
\nThe Americans realized early on that many of their interests in this crisis had been achieved and prepared to withdraw. They did what a maritime power usually does when it decides to turn its attention elsewhere as they sailed back to their own region. The main difference between a maritime power and a continental power lies in the freedom to choose where to deploy military forces. A maritime power can choose where to deploy them and launch strikes across various parts of the world\u2019s oceans. This is usually carried out in the form of raids, as large-scale expeditionary campaigns rarely prove successful. The US decided it was time to leave.
\nBut they didn\u2019t want the withdrawal to be accompanied by the collapse of the Ukrainian regime. The US incorporated its withdrawal and the reorientation of its priorities towards East Asia into its policy towards its NATO allies. It handed over responsibility for supporting Ukraine to them and assumed the role of \u201cmoderator\u201d as a negotiator who, rather than being the instigator of the crisis, is steering it towards a resolution. US strategic documents state an interest in bringing the Ukraine crisis to an end.<\/p>\n
European leaders join Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky for a White House meeting with US President Donald Trump. August 18, 2025.<\/p>\n
\u00a9\u00a0 Win McNamee\/Getty Images <\/p>\n
Yet the US behaved treacherously toward both Ukraine and its European allies, saddling them with this burden without warning. The Western Europeans lack military resources, technological capabilities, strategic thinking, and awareness of their own interests comparable to those of the Americans, qualities that enable them to weigh up causes and consequences, to discern what is achievable and what is not by military means, and to identify where their bloc\u2019s interests lie in this crisis.
\nThese Europeans currently have a financial instrument of considerable weight at their disposal, in essence, the only one they can draw upon. They are using it wastefully, given the domestic debt of most major European states is approaching or exceeding 100% of GDP. They can\u2019t obtain external compensation for their military expenditure, and there\u2019s no hope of a Ukrainian victory.
\nIf there were any hope, they would be counting on recouping their losses through Russian resources, through new deals with Russia on new terms. None of these hopes is being realized.<\/p>\n
Read more<\/p>\n
Zelensky has made his choice, now America must make its own<\/p>\n
Moreover, due to a lack of strategic experience, lost as a result of American patronage and the nuclear umbrella, these Europeans are beginning to deny their own geography. To deny that Russia is on the continent alongside them.
\nGeography is a constant, an immutable part of the foreign policy system. Governments and historical circumstances may change, but geography remains unchanged.
\nThe course towards a long-term confrontation with their largest neighbor, a source of many benefits for the Western European economy, which they have now lost, demonstrates the narrowness of their vision. Domestic political processes in the EU suggest that, following the Americans\u2019 example, it is time for these Europeans to reflect on what their interests are, which of these are achievable in the course of the Ukraine crisis, which are not, and what the possible trajectory might be. So far, the Western Europeans haven\u2019t made any good moves.
\nWhen there are no good moves, it is better to pass a turn and stop making mistakes. So far, as our President [Vladimir Putin] put it, it looks like a series of mistakes, one after another.
\nBig spending, little strategic power
\nEvgeny Kuznetsov: Won\u2019t they get tired of playing this game?
\nAndrey Sushentsov: Western Europeans states don\u2019t possess the full strategic autonomy enjoyed by Russia and the US, and are not entirely capable of acting collectively from a unified position. Every major decision requires the consensus of nearly 30 countries.
\nThe European Commission doesn\u2019t have a very substantial budget of its own but relies on the budgets of the nation states. Despite the single currency, debt is measured separately for each country.<\/p>\n
Andrey Sushentsov, dean of the Faculty of International Relations, MGIMO University, at SPIEF-2023.<\/p>\n
\u00a9\u00a0Sputnik \/ Konstantin Mihalchevskiy \/ Host photo agency RIA Novosti <\/p>\n
There is no unified army. It\u2019s a far cry from even the most loosely organized confederation. They would carry strategic weight if they were capable of acting in unison, but there\u2019s no sign of this. Western Europeans are terrified of being directly drawn into a military crisis with Russia. Speculation about sending troops into Ukraine always ends with the caveat that this will only happen once a lasting peace and a ceasefire have been achieved.
\nIn part, their enthusiasm is fueled by what they perceive to be the relatively low cost of supporting Ukraine and this proxy conflict. They have no qualms about Ukraine. They are indifferent to what will become of it, its borders or its population. They express rhetorical outrage, flock to summits, pose for \u201cfamily photographs,\u201d and make categorical statements. But in essence, this is a gathering of onlookers who are not directly involved in the military crisis.<\/p>\n
Read more<\/p>\n
American bombs, European pilots: Who does what in NATO\u2019s nuclear club?<\/p>\n
The tool at their disposal is debt financing at Ukraine\u2019s expense, amounting to nearly $500 billion. An astronomical sum which has failed to deliver the strategically necessary results, whilst worsening their own position. All that money has gone up in smoke.
\nRussia as the glue holding Europe together
\nEvgeny Kuznetsov: The EU is not abandoning its plans to impose ever more restrictions on Russia. Incidentally, Brussels has also added you to its sanctions list. At the same time, some European leaders are calling for dialogue with Russia. Is that possible at present?
\nAndrey Sushentsov: Western Europeans are using the Ukraine crisis as a platform for unity, to become a more cohesive entity. Their strategic lack of autonomy, the prominent role of the Americans, and their internal fragmentation mean that the only platform for solidarity is an anti-Russian one.
\nThe relevance varies from country to country. For Southern Europe, it\u2019s not so obvious. For Spain, despite its anti-Russian government, Palestine and the Middle East are more important. The Baltic states and Northern Europe have an alarmist and militaristic outlook. Some share a border with us. The people in charge are a peculiar lot; one can expect all sorts of things. But no one wants to involve their armed forces in the Ukraine crisis, as North Korea has done on our side.
\nThey are using Ukraine to strengthen their own agency and take steps towards coordinated action. These steps are not particularly effective. However, joint plans are being drawn up and substantial funding is being allocated.<\/p>\n
The ‘Coalition of the Willing’ meeting in Kiev on August 24, 2026.<\/p>\n
\u00a9\u00a0Getty Images \/ Henry Nicholls-WPA Pool\/Getty Images <\/p>\n
One unresolved issue is the restructuring of the Western European defense industry; it\u2019s fragmented and produces around 15 different types of main battle tank with guns of varying calibers. Standardization is a major and difficult challenge. A catalyst is needed. In other words, they are, to some extent, tackling an internal challenge.
\nPeace alongside Russia \u2013 or a strategic dead end
\nEvgeny Kuznetsov:\u00a0Do the NATO Europeans want to sit at the negotiating table with Russia, representing a \u201cunited Europe,\u201d in order to compensate for their strategic lack of autonomy?<\/p>\n
Read more<\/p>\n
Sanctions are permanent, until Washington decides otherwise<\/p>\n
Andrey Sushentsov: Their tactics for establishing agency include providing financial aid to Ukraine, the theft of Russia\u2019s gold and foreign exchange reserves, the withholding and disposal of revenues, and an attempt to share the blame for this crime amongst everyone. If it\u2019s a crime, then it\u2019s a collective one, so that no single country is held solely responsible. And they are resolving many technical issues.
\nThe US doesn\u2019t resolve such issues, nor does Russia. We can afford to take strategic, autonomous, purposeful and consistent action. These Europeans take a step back, a step forward, two steps back; they look over their shoulders and seek consensus.
\nIt\u2019s in Russia\u2019s interests to invite them to the negotiating table only if it is clear that these Europeans prioritize a stable world on the continent, based on the principle of \u201cpeace alongside Russia,\u201d\u00a0rather than against Russia. The \u201cpeace against Russia\u201d approach is inherently unstable and a dead end for Western Europe. It dooms them to fall behind, to strategic defeat, and to never becoming a true player on the world stage. The more internal contradictions there are within the bloc regarding priorities, the more fragile it becomes, and the Russian question is gradually becoming precisely such an issue.
\nUkraine\u2019s \u2018pyramid of trust\u2019 is crumbling
\nEvgeny Kuznetsov: You said that the \u201cpyramid of trust\u201d surrounding Ukraine will soon crumble. When will this finally happen?
\nAndrey Sushentsov: From the Russian perspective, the logic behind this crisis is that we are waging a war to wear down our opponents and deplete their resources. We are targeting their rear lines and breaking their \u201ccontinental sword.\u201d<\/p>\n
A detail of the Mriya (“The Dream”) cargo plane, the heaviest airplane ever flown, which was destroyed in the first days of Russia’s military operation<\/p>\n
\u00a9\u00a0Getty Images \/ Roman Pilipey\/Getty Images <\/p>\n
We are demonstrating that their strategy is irrelevant; its objectives are unattainable. And the resources they are expending will, over time, be needed in ever-greater quantities. The existing ones are becoming obsolete, as are the systems for utilizing them on Ukrainian territory. They need to be replenished and rebuilt.
\nBuilding infrastructure is extremely costly; in wartime conditions, it is simply impossible. In time, Western countries themselves will realize the unviability of this strategy. The opposition within those countries is already openly voicing its outrage and stating that this is a dead end.<\/p>\n
Read more<\/p>\n
Ukraine\u2019s worst diplomatic nightmare just got closer<\/p>\n
[Friedrich] Merz\u2019s visit to Kiev was heavily criticized by the entire opposition, at a time when Germany\u2019s national debt is rising, the chancellor travels to Kiev and once again promises money and resources, essentially at the expense of the German people. The scale of the resources being invested is becoming so significant that the question arises as to what justifies it. What are Berlin\u2019s objectives, what is it achieving, and what is it failing to achieve?
\nThere are increasingly insistent calls for the Ukrainian leadership to take a realistic view of the situation and understand what is achievable and what is not. The \u201cpyramid of trust\u201d is crumbling. One after another, the parties involved are adopting an increasingly detached stance on this issue.
\nTheir primary and secondary hopes have not been realized. Now they are almost left high and dry. We must admit, it was a mistake.
\nNo one wants to take responsibility for it. It has not only a political but also a financial dimension. Who should be held to account for the hundreds of billions of euros spent on a strategically futile venture that has antagonized Russia and undermined security on the continent?
\nThat is why we are talking about a short-term historical perspective. It may come to an end in the coming months, or perhaps in the coming years. But we are not talking about a decade-long war. The point is that this will still remain a crisis with its own distinct phases, and we are currently in the final phase of its resolution.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
As Washington shifts the Ukraine burden to Europe, Andrey Sushentsov examines the EU\u2019s strategic limits and its costly confrontation with Russia Andrey Sushentsov, dean of the Faculty of International Relations…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":40345,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rop_custom_images_group":[],"rop_custom_messages_group":[],"rop_publish_now":"initial","rop_publish_now_accounts":[],"rop_publish_now_history":[],"rop_publish_now_status":"pending","footnotes":""},"categories":[4,6,3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-40344","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-economy","category-environment","category-politics"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t