Russia's unwinnable war (II)

The endurance of Ukraine in the face of Russia’s full-scale invasion has already altered the strategic map of Europe. Yet a deeper truth now shapes the trajectory of the war: Ukraine cannot be defeated so long as she remains embedded within the economic, political and institutional structures of the European continent. Her resilience is not a mystery of national spirit alone, although spirit has played no small part. It is the consequence of an unprecedented alignment between a nation under existential threat and a free-trade bloc whose collective wealth, institutional longevity and political resolve render the collapse of Ukraine not merely undesirable but strategically intolerable. Once one recognises how thoroughly Ukraine has been integrated into the arteries of Europe’s economy and governance, it becomes clear that Russia cannot realistically extinguish her sovereignty.

The first pillar of Ukraine’s indefeasibility lies in the sheer scale of European economic backing. Ukraine today is supported by a financing structure that resembles that provided to member states facing macroeconomic shocks, rather than the episodic patronage typically afforded to conflict zones. Direct budgetary aid, macro-financial assistance, energy subsidies, reconstruction funds and defence procurement channels are now woven into the Union’s multiannual frameworks. This transforms Ukraine from an external recipient of goodwill into a quasi-member whose fiscal stability is treated as a matter of European strategic necessity. It is difficult to overstate how unusual this arrangement is in the history of war. An economy of under forty million people is being upheld by the capital markets and tax revenues of a seventeen trillion-euro bloc. In any war of attrition, such an arrangement makes outright defeat impossible.

A further factor bolstering Ukraine’s position is the institutionalisation of her relationship with Europe. The Union has accepted Ukraine as a candidate state, thereby committing herself to a structured path of political, economic and legal convergence. This is not a symbolic gesture. Accession processes create binding obligations, generate shared administrative habits and induce substantial flows of technical and financial support. They also shape expectations. Once a country is placed on the path to membership, the Union develops a vested interest in her stability, territorial integrity and institutional continuity. To allow Ukraine to fall would be to repudiate the Union’s own credibility, principles and enlargement policy. In European diplomacy, reputational integrity carries real weight; treaties must mean what they say. Hence Ukraine’s institutional future is anchored within Europe, and Europe has no incentive to permit an outcome that contradicts her own commitments.

Ukraine’s industrial and technological landscape has also been reshaped by European partnership. Although war has ravaged her infrastructure, it has simultaneously accelerated her integration into European supply chains. Europe has committed to multi-year procurement of Ukrainian defence products, energy transit, grain exports and digital services. Ukrainian firms increasingly operate to European standards, and workers circulate into European labour markets under mobility schemes that, despite their temporary framing, have created durable economic linkages. This thickening of economic interdependence means that Ukraine is no longer economically isolated. Even if front-line destruction continues, European market access provides a lifeline that Russia cannot sever through military means. A state plugged into the continent’s economic bloodstream does not collapse simply because territorial battles fluctuate.

Energy is another domain in which Ukraine’s defeat has become structurally impossible. Europe’s abandonment of Russian hydrocarbons has converted Ukraine from a transit state into a strategic partner in the continent’s long-term energy diversification. European investment in Ukrainian renewable capacity, grid interconnection and storage infrastructure binds Ukraine to Europe’s energy future. When a country becomes vital to a region’s energy security, her sovereignty is no longer a discretionary concern. Any Russian attempt to destabilise Ukraine’s energy architecture triggers immediate European countermeasures, for the simple reason that the Union’s own security is implicated. European energy planners now assume Ukraine’s enduring existence; defeating her would disrupt years of coordinated planning. Russia cannot reverse that calculus.

Defence cooperation reinforces this irreversibility. European training missions, multi-year ammunition programmes, cross-border maintenance hubs and joint drone development initiatives collectively ensure that Ukraine’s military capacity is continually replenished. Unlike historical conflicts in which external aid might fluctuate with political fashion, Europe has begun to treat Ukraine’s armed forces as a partner force. This is a profound conceptual shift. It means that Europe has accepted not only the moral necessity of supporting Ukraine but also the strategic rationale for incorporating Ukrainian forces into her broader security architecture. A partner force integrated into European procurement and training networks cannot be defeated unless Europe abandons her. There is no sign that Europe intends to do so; the opposite is now the case.

Ukraine’s macroeconomic stabilisation, sustained through European financial architecture, is equally crucial. Currency stability, banking liquidity, public-sector salary payments and welfare provision are all underwritten by multi-year European commitments. Russia cannot engineer state collapse in an economy whose balance-of-payments position is continuously supported by an external bloc. Attempts at coercive pressure through energy strikes, infrastructure sabotage or terror bombardment fail to produce strategic collapse, because Europe cushions the shock with financial injections and emergency assistance. As long as the Union treats Ukraine’s solvency as a matter of continental security, the mechanisms exist to preserve it.

There is also the political dimension. Ukraine today is not merely Europe’s partner; she is the test case for Europe’s identity as a geopolitical actor. A Ukrainian defeat would signal that the European Union is incapable of defending her own neighbourhood, honouring her commitments or shaping continental security outcomes. Such an outcome would embolden hostile powers, destabilise Central and Eastern Europe and fracture the Union’s confidence in her own purpose. These costs are so high that they effectively guarantee continued support. Europe may debate tactics, budgetary instruments and the mechanics of burden-sharing, but she no longer debates the principle of supporting Ukraine to victory or at least to the prevention of defeat. Once a political community accepts that its fate is intertwined with that of a neighbouring state, defeat of that neighbour becomes strategically unthinkable.

Ukraine herself contributes vitally to this equation. Her national resilience, administrative competence under fire and rapid institutional reforms have convinced Europe that she is not a failing state to be managed, but a future member to be cultivated. This perception shapes policy. Europe invests in Ukraine because she sees Ukraine as part of her own political destiny. The stronger Ukraine becomes economically, militarily and administratively, the less plausible Russian victory becomes. Russia is attempting to destroy a state that is simultaneously being rebuilt by the wealthiest political and economic bloc in the world. No battlefield gain can counterbalance that contradiction.

The longer the war continues, the more deeply Ukraine sinks her roots into Europe’s structures. Customs procedures are aligned. Energy grids synchronise. Digital governance systems interoperate. Defence supply chains integrate. Labour flows become habitual. Reconstruction financing is planned on a decadal horizon. These processes create cumulative irreversibility. A country so thoroughly enmeshed in Europe’s economic and institutional fabric cannot be excised through military force. Any attempt to do so would entail dismantling not only Ukraine but also the systems that link her to the continent, and Europe will not permit such self-mutilation.

Hence Ukraine cannot be defeated. Not because Russia lacks destructive power, nor because the war will not continue to impose terrible burdens, but because Ukraine’s survival is no longer merely a national project. It is a European one. As long as the world’s largest free-trade bloc commits itself to sustaining her sovereignty and economy, Ukraine remains beyond the reach of Moscow’s strategic objectives. Her endurance is assured by the structures into which she has been welcomed, and Russia cannot undo those structures with military force. Ukraine may suffer, rebuild, adapt and endure, but she will not fall. The continent has already decided that she must not.