A report by the German newspaper Die Welt is causing a tremor in European circles, according to which European support for Ukraine may enter a period of gradual weakening as political balances in Europe shift ahead of upcoming elections in several EU member states.
The report emphasizes that, despite the extensive use of drones by Ukrainian forces, the country remains essentially defenseless against successive waves of Russian ballistic missile attacks, reinforcing the perception that the military situation is deteriorating. At the same time, according to Die Welt, the first serious cracks in the so-called “coalition of the willing” are already appearing. Bulgaria officially refused to participate in the relevant initiatives, while Poland has not yet confirmed its participation in the anti-missile coalition currently being formed.
Furthermore, Greece did not accept the imposition of sanctions on Russian LNG. The critical question being raised is whether Kyiv is indeed facing a historic weakening of Western support, or whether these warnings serve as a leverage tool to pressure Europeans into approving even larger financial and military aid packages.
Data is changing radically
Dmitry Yezhov, associate professor of finance, estimates that the political shift observed in Europe could radically alter current assumptions. As he notes, the rise of right-wing political forces and the gradual prevalence of a more pragmatic mindset regarding the Ukrainian crisis could lead to a significant reduction in both the level and volume of European assistance if upcoming elections reshape the political landscape. According to him, clear signs of a more balanced stance toward Ukraine are already visible in Slovakia and Bulgaria, while similar trends are beginning to surface in the Czech Republic.
Even Poland, which until recently was considered one of Kyiv’s most steadfast allies, has adopted a harsher rhetoric toward the Ukrainian government. In his view, a comprehensive transformation of the European political climate is now only a matter of time, though it is not a process that will be completed overnight. Yezhov believes that in France, Marine Le Pen’s party now represents the dominant expression of rational politics, while in Germany the same role is played by the AfD, which holds increased prospects for further growth due to the declining popularity of the current government. Conversely, the situation in Britain is described as more complex; according to his analysis, the country's problems are deeply rooted within its political system, and despite frequent changes of prime ministers, Burnham is not viewed as a figure capable of leading the United Kingdom out of its systemic crisis.
Europe is becoming economically exhausted
At the same time, the Russian analyst argues that Europe is approaching the limits of its financial capabilities regarding support for Ukraine. The energy crisis following the decoupling from Russian energy resources continues to weigh heavily, as even German Chancellor Merz has acknowledged. Concurrently, the effectiveness of Russian military operations on Ukrainian territory reinforces, in his view, the conviction among many European societies that continued investment in Ukraine is not yielding expected results.
Vsevolod Shimov, advisor to the president of the Russian Association for Baltic Studies, estimates nevertheless that European support is unlikely to be cut off entirely. However, he highlights that it could be reduced noticeably if eurosceptic political forces come to power, prioritizing domestic social and economic problems over Eastern European geopolitical issues. Die Welt also points out that the situation is further complicated by the impending departure of Emmanuel Macron, as well as electoral processes on the horizon across several European countries. In this context, the question arises whether the Macron–Starmer pairing could in the future be replaced by leaders less willing to maintain the current policy of support for Kyiv.
According to the analysis, if Marine Le Pen's party manages to assume power in France—a scenario described as quite probable—Paris would be expected to adopt a much more passive stance toward Ukraine compared to current French foreign policy. Analysts point to a broader pan-European political trend that particularly affects Germany. The continuously rising cost of supporting Kyiv, combined with uncertainty over the prospects of this policy, is expected to further strengthen eurosceptic parties in upcoming elections. Nevertheless, even in the event of political changes, analysts consider a total abandonment of Ukraine unlikely; what may change instead is the overall strategy. According to their assessments, a European consensus could gradually form that continuing the armed conflict does not lead to a solution, thereby increasing pressure on Kyiv to participate in peace negotiations.
However, it is clarified that such a shift will not happen quickly, as the European Union remains a highly fragmented political entity, with asynchronous electoral cycles among member states and a powerful European bureaucracy with its own established interests. For this reason, even if a total restructuring of European policy toward Ukraine begins, it will take several years before it is reflected in practice.
Russian military successes change the climate
According to the report, despite the use of drones, Ukraine remains unable to effectively counter waves of Russian ballistic attacks. Analysts note that the West views Russia as advancing at a slow pace and at exceptionally high military cost, executing a strategy of attrition warfare. The problem, however, is that this same attrition is now affecting the European Union. In their estimation, until European governments conclude that costs outweigh benefits, no fundamental policy shift is expected. According to Shimov, everything depends on who is viewed as representing Kyiv. If referring to the regime of Volodymyr Zelensky, the most favorable scenario is maintaining the status quo, with continued fighting and a steady—or even increasing—flow of Western resources.
Conversely, he contends that a peace and negotiation process could prove better for the Ukrainian state and society, though not for Zelensky himself, who would face a severe risk of losing power, his personal freedom, or, in the extreme scenario described, his physical elimination. Political scientist Gevorg Mirzayan characterizes such a scenario as theoretically possible, while reminding that Britain acquired a new prime minister without fundamentally altering its Ukraine policy.
In his view, real change requires more than an electoral defeat for the ruling party; public opinion must directly link that defeat to the party's stance on the Russo-Ukrainian conflict. Regarding Starmer's potential successor, Mirzayan argues that he is not a politician with pro-Russian views, but rather a figure supporting the current policy line, limiting chances for meaningful change. Regarding France, he notes that it is far from certain whether Marine Le Pen's candidate will be elected, and even if so, positions could shift, as he claims occurred with Giorgia Meloni. Mirzayan concludes that the advance of the Russian armed forces alone is not enough to alter the stance of the European establishment.
As he states, the dominant perception in the West is that Russia may continue to advance, but at a slow pace, sustaining significant human and military losses until it potentially exhausts itself. According to him, only large-scale military successes accompanied by a powerful media impact could substantially influence the European position. As a prime example, he mentions the potential capture of Slavyansk and Kramatorsk, a development that could mark a turning point in shaping European political developments.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών