Ukraine’s resilience against Russian aggression highlights the urgent need for Europe to secure its sovereignty and regional stability. A compromise solution would mirror the 1938 Munich Agreement, creating a fragile and short-lived peace that risks a larger conflict. To prevent this, European countries must unite in providing decisive military and financial support to Ukraine, ensuring it can defend itself and maintain sovereignty. Acting swiftly, Europe can strengthen its own security by helping Ukraine achieve victory and deterring future threats.
More than hundred of leading experts put their name to appeal:
For nearly a thousand days, Ukraine has resisted full-scale Russian aggression: the heroism of its armed forces and its people stand as an example to all free nations. Ukraine and its allies face a twin strategic danger.
The first is that an incoming Trump administration will attempt to impose a deal with Russia detrimental to Ukraine’s interests, and to European security. This would leave Ukraine adrift from NATO and the EU, in a condition of fake neutrality – and Europe with a destabilizing geopolitical greyzone in the heart of the continent.
European governments who refuse to believe Ukraine can win, and are tempted to commit – at best – only to the bolstering of NATO defence in response to a Ukrainian defeat, could become decisive within the alliance, while damaging its credibility.
In both cases the parallels with the 1938 Munich Agreement are clear: it would be a false ‘peace’ achieved through European acquiescence in the dismembering of a sovereign state, and would leave that state unable to defend itself against future aggression, while buying an unacceptably small amount of time for our own rearmament. It would be likely to lead to a wider and even more destructive war.
In the first scenario, such a deal would be Trump’s Munich. In the second it would be – collectively as Europeans – our Munich.
The signatories of this appeal, which is being circulated privately among policymakers in the NATO alliance, are convinced that a third course is possible, which can lead to Ukraine’s survival as a sovereign state and Russia’s defeat. This is not only the right thing to do; it is the best way to secure Europe in the short-term and buy ourselves time to build the capabilities we need to defend ourselves in future.
Our belief is premised on five grounds.
1. The inevitability of Russia prevailing is a myth. Russia cannot sustain its war effort at current levels beyond 2025. For example, Russia is losing 260 heavy caliber cannon barrels (artillery and tank) per month and can produce only 20.[1] Likewise,
Russia is losing an average of 144 infantry fighting vehicles per month, yet can produce only 17.[2] For these items of equipment, as with many others, Russia is scheduled to exhaust its stockpiles in the second half of 2025.
-
There is no credible plan for Ukrainian (or European) security after any ‘ceasefire’. The Putin regime has demonstrated time and again that it is not a credible negotiating partner and that it cannot be trusted to keep to any ‘deal’ that it signs. Yet Ukraine’s route into NATO – the only truly credible security guarantee in the medium term – is blocked and there are no compelling alternative offers yet on the table. If this continues to be the case, a ceasefire only buys Russia time to reconstitute its forces, while European allies have not yet kicked their own production into gear, leaving us at a major disadvantage.
-
Failing to win endangers all European allies. A ‘Minsk III’ (or Munich II) agreement, reached in full knowledge that it was the failure of Western willpower that obligated it, would neither guarantee Ukraine’s stability nor enhance the security of its European neighbours. To the contrary, demographic models suggest it would create a new refugee crisis in Europe and require uplifts of European defence spending well above any currently envisaged. It would also signal weakness and a lack of resolve that only invite coercion upon us.
-
The route to Ukrainian victory still exists. This is well understood in defence ministries across European NATO states. Using new military technology we can quickly leverage Europe’s industrial capacity to build the capabilities Ukraine needs to disable Russia’s war machine. For example, building a massed precision strike force for Ukraine, with no external restrictions on its targeting, is within our grasp. To realise this goal, we must, however, strategically focus our support around a clear theory of victory.
-
Those who want to act, can. The means to victory do not require sign-off at the level of the 32-country NATO alliance but can be provided by a coalition of willing powers, including all those committed to Ukraine’s recovery of its currently occupied territory and then to providing Kyiv with real security guarantees.[3] These are the countries that understand that our own security is dependent on defeating Russia in Ukraine and thus buying ourselves time to boost our deterrence. They understand that we still can, and must, act in the name of our security and freedom – and that if we do so in ways that change facts and policy on the ground, others will follow.
With the US election looming, time is of the essence. We are launching this appeal today because it is essential that European capitals arm themselves with a real contingency plan – both in the event of a Trump victory, a withdrawal of support and pressure exerted on Ukraine to accept permanent neutrality and territorial concession, or in the event of a Harris victory and the continuation of a policy that would fail to secure Ukraine and thus endanger Europe.
The course of action we propose is, for a coalition of willing nations within NATO to commit to enhance military and financial support to Kyiv and to recommit to the aim of a sovereign Ukraine within its borders recognised by international law, focused around a clear strategy and theory of victory. This is necessary to avoid any immediate detrimental effects in Ukraine after the election, which would aid Russia, to live up to our alliance commitments and to take responsibility for our own security.
Full letter and list of signatories can be read at the link here.
