We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Ukraine on the path to joining NATO, says deputy Mircea Geoanǎ
After two years of fighting and brutal warfare in Ukraine, NATO deputy Mircea Geoanǎ says the stakes of the war could not be higher for the West. Ian Bremmer spoke with Geoanǎ on GZERO World at the Munich Security Conference and asked him to give a sober assessment of the war so far, as political battles and mounting crisis fatigue in the US and EU put military and financial assistance for Kyiv in jeopardy. Geoanǎ says the West can't afford to desert Ukraine in its time of need.
“Ukraine will become a member of NATO, it will become a member of the EU,” the NATO deputy warns, “If they don’t prevail, there is no NATO, there’s no EU.”
NATO and Ukraine are getting closer every day, Geoanǎ argues, they're becoming more interoperable with each other, and a level of trust has developed with Kyiv. Abandoning the fight now would be a broader sign of the West’s collective ability to deal with global security challenges coming from elsewhere in the world, like Iran and North Korea. This war is bigger than Ukraine, which is why it’s so important for allies to stay united.
Watch full episode here: Can Ukraine win the war?
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week online and on US public television. Check local listings.
Can Ukraine win the war?
Are NATO allies as united in their support for Kyiv as they were when Russia began its invasion of Ukraine two years ago? That was the question at the top of everyone’s minds at the Munich Security Conference, where world leaders gathered to discuss the biggest challenges to global security. On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer sat down with Deputy Secretary General Mirceǎ Geoana on the sidelines of Munich to discuss the ongoing war in Ukraine and what the conflict means for the future of the NATO alliance.
“Ukraine is more than Ukraine, and Ukraine is more than European security,” Geoanǎ explains, “Ukraine is an indicator of the willingness and the capacity of the West to be able to cope with challenges coming from China or anywhere else.”
Geoanǎ also called the recent death of Alexei Navalny a “wake-up call” for the West and challenged President Trump’s recent comments about allowing Russia to invade NATO countries that don’t meet the target of spending 2% of GDP on defense. While he admits Europe could do better, he points out that NATO allies are well above the 2% target on aggregate due to heightened security concerns in former Soviet countries and the Baltics.
“In the end, this alliance, [which will celebrate] 75 years in the next few weeks, will be as indispensable to America and to all of us like it’s been since the inception,” Geoanǎ says.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week online and on US public television. Check local listings.
What's the plan for Ukraine after two years of war? Ian Bremmer explains
As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine enters its third year, what's the plan for both sides as casualties rise, Europe's support wavers and US funding for Ukraine hangs in the balance?
It’s been two years since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which shows no signs of ending any time soon. On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer looks at how Ukraine and Russia have fared so far and what comes next for Kyiv and Moscow. So far, the numbers tell a grim story. Both countries have lost around 70,000 troops each, with hundreds of thousands more injured, according to recent estimates. Meanwhile, Russia still occupies around a fifth of Ukrainian territory. So what’s the plan?
On the Ukrainian side, the strategy remains the same: survive. After a disappointing summer counteroffensive and recent shakeup of Ukrainian military leadership, Kyiv is hoping recent attacks inside Russia can put Moscow on its back foot. The Kremlin, for its part, is waiting out the clock, banking on war fatigue in Europe and political infighting in the US to stem the flow of military assistance to Ukraine. A prospect that seems all the more likely if Donald Trump wins the US election in November.
Ninety-two percent of Ukrainian citizens say that the only acceptable end to the war would be a complete Russian withdrawal from their country, including Crimea. As the conflict enters a third year, 44 million Ukrainians overwhelmingly want to defend the territory, but is that enough to win?
Watch the upcoming episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer on US public television this weekend (check local listings) and at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld.
What Ukraine needs after two years of war with Russia
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here and a Quick Take for the second anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I don'tknow what you give on a second anniversary, but I know what Ukraine wants. It's ammo, it's more weapons. It is an environment where they have lost their first city, more of a large town to the Russians since last May.
And the reason for that, it's not that Ukrainians aren't willing to fight. It's not a lack of courage. It's not even a lack of troops. It's a lack of support from the United States and Europe. Yes, from the United States and Europe. The United States, which is the largest military power in the world for now, does not have approval from Congress to continue sending military support to Ukraine. Meanwhile, the Europeans are not digging deep. They do have more ammunition to send. But right now that's going to other countries around the world. They have contracts with like the UAE and their willingness to prioritize Ukraine over those contracts because of a national emergency. They'd rather make the money. Look, I understand all of that, but at the end of the day, the Ukrainians are the ones that are taking it on the chin.
And this is a real challenge for the future of the war and the future of NATO. Two years later, NATO is already feeling much more stressed than it was in the immediate aftermath of the war. You'll remember that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz spoke of a Zeitenwende, a turning point where Germany would have to spend more on their national defense and would have to culturally get over their unwillingness to provide weapons for other countries to ensure that Ukraine could defend itself. We saw that from France. We saw it first and foremost from the front line countries like the Baltic states. Tiny but hitting much above their weight. The Poles, of course, not only sending enormous amounts of weapons, but also helping to train Ukrainian soldiers and hosting, even in their homes, millions of Ukrainians refugees that were fleeing from the country, fleeing from the Russian invasion.
Despite all of this, the war has changed its tempo. It's changed its trajectory. Right now. The Ukrainians are on defense. The Russians are taking somewhat slightly more territory, but they're also continuing to engage in missile strikes deep into Ukrainian territory. And we just found out that the first level of advanced weapons, missiles from Iran now being sent to Russia in addition to thousands of railway containers of ammunition and short range missiles from North Korea. This is not an axis of resistance, much closer to an axis of evil. Three chaos actors working together in military alliance to help ensure that there is more instability, more volatility in the world, and that the West is under more pressure. And that is a significant problem for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Two years on the ability of Ukraine to retake all of their territory seems a pipe dream.
It's almost inconceivable that they are not going to be partitioned and no one's going to accept that in the West, certainly not Ukraine, not the United States, at least not under the Biden administration and not any of the frontline NATO countries. And yet the Ukrainians will have no ability to retake that land. What does that mean? Can Ukraine still win?
Well, it depends on what you mean in defining victory. I can see Ukraine having strong security guarantees from the United States, the United Kingdom, Poland, maybe some others that could prevent the Russians from taking more Ukrainian territory, prevent them from being able to overthrow Ukraine. I can imagine large amounts of money, especially from Europe, which has done the lion's share of the economic support from Ukraine even more than the United States has, though not many people talk about that over the last two years to help ensure that Ukraine will be able to reconstruct its economy, its infrastructure, its system.
And I can also see Ukraine being able to join the European Union over the long term, which allows them to have economic and political reforms that will improve the lives of the average Ukrainian. That is a win for Ukraine in the sense that it would afford the vast majority of Ukrainians a much better life and future than they would have had before the Russian invasion in 22 or before the Russian invasion in 2014. But there are no guarantees. And absent significant and committed support ongoing from the Americans and Europeans to ensure that future, the potential that the Ukrainians will be overthrown, they'll lose more of their territory and that the country will fall apart, becomes greater. And that certainly would feel like a Russian victory in Ukraine. It's not a Russian victory globally because of course in that environment Russia would still have the majority of its assets, hundreds of billions of dollars externally frozen. The Russians would have massive sanctions from the West and they wouldn't be able to do business with them going forward. That means particularly stranded gas because they don't have the infrastructure to pipe it anywhere else. It means that Russia is seen as a rogue state whose principal allies are countries like Iran and North Korea, not the friends that you really want to have on the international stage.
That's embarrassing for them. It's also a loss. It's a loss because NATO has expanded Finland and soon Sweden, which is ostensibly why the Russians wanted to invade Ukraine in the beginning because they didn't want more of a NATO's threat against them. And now they have much more that they have to defend against. Who do we blame for all of this?
Of course we blame Putin. But you know what? I also blame NATO. I do think that NATO's is responsible in significant part for the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. You know why? Because when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, when they illegally annexed Crimea and when they illegally sent their little green men who we all knew were really Russian soldiers and occupied illegally, parts of southeast Ukraine, the West did virtually nothing. NATO did virtually nothing. The view was, “hey, these guys aren't a part of NATO. We're not responsible.” In fact, not only were sanctions very limited, but the Europeans sent heads of state to go and congratulate Putin for the World Cup that he was hosting at the very moment that the Russians were occupying illegally parts of Ukraine. This war has been going on for ten years and NATO has been unconcerned until the Russians finally decided in 2022, “Hey, we can get away with this. The Americans, the Europeans don't really care. Look at what just happened in Afghanistan. We're going to invade the entire country. We're going to get rid of Zelensky once and for all. “ A massive misjudgment on Putin's part. But the misjudgment wasn't about NATO's response. The misjudgment was about Russia's own capabilities. And if they had been strong enough to be able to overthrow Zelensky in the two weeks that Putin thought would happen and that the Americans and Europeans did as well, we'd be in a radically different position today. No, it is only the fact that Putin is an incapable leader who is massively corrupt and doesn't get good information from his own people. And it's only because the Ukrainians fought with incredible, almost inhuman courage over the first months and now over two years that Ukraine still has a shot today. It's only because of that that NATO isn't completely at fault for Ukraine falling apart.
But unfortunately, Ukraine's future still very much hangs in the balance and that's going to require a lot more political strength and unity from the United States, from Europe, the transatlantic relationship and NATO, then we may be able to expect going forward. That's where we are two years in.
That's it for me. And I'll talk to you all real soon.
- Graphic Truth: What would Ukrainians give up for peace? ›
- Zelensky has “something serious in mind” ›
- Russia is winning? Winning what? ›
- Yes, Vladimir Putin is winning. ›
- Ukraine war sees escalation of weapons and words ›
- Russia-Ukraine: Two Years of War ›
- Ukraine is still standing two years after Russian invasion - GZERO Media ›
- A Russian victory would end the global order, says Yuval Noah Harari - GZERO Media ›
President Volodymyr Zelenskiy of Ukraine is answering questions from journalists during a large summary press conference in Kyiv, Ukraine, on December 19, 2023.
Can Russian money fund Ukraine’s fight?
Washington is leading the charge to confiscate some $300 billion in Russian assets frozen in G7 countries, but some allies in Europe are worried about the legal precedent it would set and how Moscow might retaliate.
Kyiv is facing a funding shortfall as partisan fighting over federal spending in the US leaves money for Ukraine in limbo, while the European Union is struggling to circumvent a Hungarian veto on sending more aid. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Washington had dispatched its last aid package under current funding to Ukraine on Wednesday.
The impasse on both sides of the Atlantic has made the notion of using Russian money to fund Ukraine’s fight look tempting, but it is not without risk. There is no clear legal mechanism for taking the assets, and on a larger scale, such a move could spook countries like China, Saudi Arabia and Brazil about the safety of storing their securities in US and European clearing houses. That’s not to mention the pressure Russia might try to impose in retaliation — although recent Russian threats toward Finland, South Korea and Japan have led to nothing.
The US is suggesting the G7 form working groups to address the legal challenges, and the best way to funnel the money to Kyiv. If fully seizing the assets proves too tough to swallow, alternatives like funneling interest earned on the frozen funds to Kyiv could still squeak through. Washington hopes to roll out a plan by the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion on February 24.
A satellite image shows smoke billowing from a Russian Black Sea Navy HQ after a missile strike, as Russia's invasion of Ukraine continues, in Sevastopol, Crimea, September 22, 2023.
Ukraine strikes Russian targets in Crimea
A rebellion among Republicans in the US House of Representatives is crystalizing a movement from some pro-Donald Trump conservatives to halt all US help for Kyiv. In a recent poll, just 41% of US respondents expressed support for military aid for Ukraine, down from 46% in May, with 35% opposed. And though leaders from 47 European countries issued a statement of support for Kyiv this week, Europe can’t make up for any financial and military shortfall if US support is suspended or significantly delayed. Ukraine’s failure so far to regain much territory from Russian forces has cast a pall over Western optimism.
And yet, Ukraine continues to use the weapons it already has to inflict serious damage on Russian forces in Crimea, the most hotly contested prize in the war. With both homemade drones and foreign-supplied cruise missiles, Ukraine has struck a number of important military targets in recent weeks. On Sept. 22, two Ukrainian missiles struck the headquarters of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet during a meeting of senior officials. On Wednesday, Russia withdrew much of the Black Sea Fleet from its main base in Crimea to a port on the Russian mainland, perhaps over fears the vessels could not be protected.
It’s a reminder that even if US help is halted or delayed in the coming weeks – and that outcome isn’t yet clear – Ukraine still has the firepower to inflict heavy damage on Russian forces and morale as the war grinds on.
A Ukrainian soldier carries artillery shells to fire in the direction of Bakhmut as the Russia-Ukraine war continues in Donetsk Oblast.
Can Ukraine get needed weapons without McCarthy?
Kevin McCarthy being ousted as House speaker means Ukrainian troops may not get the gear they need when they need it.
For now, Patrick McHenry (R-NC) holds the post of Speaker Pro Tempore and is tasked with organizing the vote for a new House speaker — but given the slim paths to a win for other candidates, he may be in charge a while.
No matter who is holding the gavel ahead of the Nov. 17 funding deadline, they’ll need their head on a swivel, says Jon Lieber, Eurasia Group’s managing director for the US.
“Whoever the new speaker is will have to keep their eyes on the group of members that tossed out McCarthy, leaving them very little room to maneuver on spending issues,” he says.
The White House’s $24 billion request “could move on a bill to keep the government funded past Nov. 17, but it's not at all clear that House Republicans could pass such a bill, despite overwhelming bipartisan support in both chambers," Lieber adds.
Trying to move the funding through a one-off supplementary funding package could jeopardize the speaker’s position despite widespread bipartisan support, further lowering its odds.
The expected paralysis is confounding for European allies. Jan Techau, Eurasia Group’s director for Germany and former speechwriter for German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, says his former colleagues in Berlin are not sugarcoating the situation.
“There is grave concern that this latest development in the US would have, first of all, a dramatic impact on Ukraine itself, but by default then also put allies under pressure,” he says.
Germany, like many countries supporting Ukraine, is drawing on pre-existing stockpiles of weapons and ammunition, everything from artillery shells to main battle tanks, without replacing them quickly. Trying to make up for unexpected bottlenecks in US support – a virtually impossible task given the relatively meager size of European arsenals compared to America’s – by drawing those stocks down further imperils Germany’s own security, but Ukraine doesn’t have time to wait for new units to come off the assembly line.
Techau says it’s not realistic that European allies could find ways to replace US funding drawdowns. Besides, even if they found a way around any NATO member objections to directly funding US weapons aid to Ukraine or tried to purchase weapons on the open market, “it wouldn’t do the trick,” he says. He estimates that production limitations on weapons are roughly 75% of the problem.
“What you need is weapons on the shelf that you can take right away and give to somebody. Only the US has that,” he adds.
FILE PHOTO: Kosovo police officers patrol, in the aftermath of a shooting incident, in Banjska village, Kosovo September 27, 2023.
Is Serbia really about to do something extreme in Kosovo?
Things are getting hot again between Serbia and Kosovo. The US and NATO have both sounded the alarm after a recent gun battle between Kosovo police and Serb nationalists in Northern Kosovo left several people dead, prompting what the White House called an “unprecedented” buildup of Serbian troops along the Kosovo border.
The background, briefly: In 2008, after nearly 20 years of conflict, majority-Albanian Kosovo declared independence from Serbia, with US backing. But many ethnic Serbs who still live in Northern Kosovo reject the legitimacy of the Kosovar government, which Serbia itself has never recognized. The outlines of a Serbia-Kosovo agreement call for Kosovo to grant autonomy to ethnic Serb areas. Clashes have periodically erupted over local elections and even license plates.
Is a wider war coming? Kosovo says Serbia is poised to invade Kosovo in what would be an eerie echo of Azerbaijan’s shock move against Nagorno-Karabakh last week — i.e., a long-running ethnic dispute in which the stronger party makes a move while the EU and US are distracted by Ukraine. And yet, over the weekend, Belgrade drew down its forces along the border after getting an earful from both Brussels and Washington.
That’s because Serbia has another interest at stake too. It still wants to see progress on its decade-old EU accession bid when the Union meets to discuss enlargement this winter. Although Serbian views on membership are split, and Belgrade’s cozy Russia ties are a further complication, President Alexander Vučić knows that invading Kosovo would be suicidal for any EU hopes.
But there’s a catch there too: Neither Serbia nor Kosovo — which has also applied to join — has any hope of getting into the EU until they resolve their own conflict first, a prospect that does not look promising at the moment.