Analysis: Ukraine has had a terrible week. Blame the US and the EU

In recent events, Ukraine has experienced a series of unfortunate incidents, leading to a challenging week for the country. Many have pointed fingers at the United States and the European Union, holding them responsible for the current situation.

The involvement of the US and the EU in Ukraine's affairs has been a contentious issue, with critics arguing that their actions have exacerbated tensions and contributed to the difficult circumstances faced by the country. However, it is essential to consider the complexities of the situation and the multiple factors at play.

While assigning blame solely to the US and the EU may oversimplify the situation, their influence and decisions have undeniably played a significant role. It is crucial to analyze the events in a comprehensive and nuanced manner to gain a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by Ukraine.

Zelensky’s trip to Washington, and the heartfelt pleas it delivered, failed. Even if Washington manages to resume funding early next year, it has already damaged Ukraine. Stalling and political theater have made vital assistance – to defend the US’s European NATO allies from being dragged deeper into the worst land war in Europe since the 1940s – fair game for partisan horse-trading.

The Congressional debate was not about war policy in Ukraine, or Kyiv’s efficiency, or why the counteroffensive had failed. It was far shallower: a tit-for-tat trade on US border policy, coupled with unreasonable demands for Ukraine to predict the future course of the war. It is a jaw-dropping failure of American foreign policy the consequences of which will echo over the next decades. Not since Neville Chamberlain had a piece of paper in his hand, suggesting the Nazis could be negotiated with, has so much been at stake.

The bleak military picture for Ukraine was the case before Congress stalled US aid. Now the challenge ahead – the possibility Ukraine may face Russia without NATO backing – weighs on the minds of those who should be focused on the winter battles ahead.

“Without aid, we are finished”, one morose Ukrainian medic told me Thursday, after months of patching troops back together, and losing a colleague in the summer. Others troops manage to be more stoic, and insist they will fight on as they have no choice. But be in no doubt: No US or EU money – or just one of those failing – quite likely means most of Ukraine will fall under Russian occupation in the next two years.

That would put a belligerent, super-charged, revenge-hungry Russian military right on NATO’s borders, something which would immediately become Washington’s problem. Why? Because outside of the NATO treaty of mutual defense, on a purely practical level, secure and free democracies in Europe are key American trading partners and the bedrock of the US’s global heft.

Yet Zelensky faces an ally in the US so split and ignorant in part of its body politic, he must pretend things are not that bad. To admit Ukraine is struggling bolsters the argument there is no point funding a loser. If he says Ukraine is winning, then why does he need more help? If it is a stalemate, then surely that is not too bad after two years?

Some fringe Republicans insist Russia was always going to win, so why delay the inevitable by providing aid that gets Ukrainians killed? Those who want to say no to Ukraine need little excuse. But it delays the next, darker question, of when do you finally say ‘no’ to Moscow? How much of Ukraine, or maybe later its European neighbors, is it acceptable for Putin to subjugate or flatten? Does this question feel at all familiar?