Two years after the Russian invasion, the West faces the critical challenge of sustaining Ukraine’s support

27 February 2024, 17:41

Britain has marked the second anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine with gloomy forecasts of the difficulties Kyiv now faces, an appeal for Europe and the United States to provide the promised military and economic aid immediately and a fresh round of sanctions against Russia in response to the killing of Alexei Navalny, the imprisoned Russian human rights activist.

British politicians have urged the American Congress to release the $60 billion promised in new US aid to Ukraine but are now blocked by Republican opposition. They have also called on other Nato allies to deliver much needed arms and ammunition to Ukraine immediately. But despite continued strong backing by British government ministers and also by the opposition Labour Party for Ukraine’s fight against aggression, there is a mood of pessimism now over the prospects of a Ukrainian victory.

This is partly because the public has begun to lose interest in the war. Many Britons are now more concerned by Israel’s attack on Gaza. This has led to huge weekly demonstrations in London and other cities, angry exchanges in parliament and bitter divisions within British society. There has been a huge upsurge in anti-Semitic incidents and hatred, with British Jews saying they feel more insecure than at any time in the past 50 years. Muslims, while largely backing the Palestinians, have also seen an upsurge in anti-Muslim violence and incitement. Amid the growing tensions over Gaza, Ukraine’s struggle has been largely overlooked.

The British press, political commentators, and analysts have also pointed to Ukraine’s growing difficulties. The loss of Bakhmut, the retreat from Avdiivka and the failure of last year’s counter-offensive are seen as indications that Ukraine is now facing a much better armed and organised Russian enemy and that the war has become a bloody stalemate, costing both sides a huge number of casualties – which Ukraine, in particular, call ill-afford.

Britain has also been alarmed by the growing tensions within Ukraine’s leadership, highlighted by the recent dismissal of General Valery Zaluzhny and growing criticism of President Zelensky’s leadership. Military commentators say that Ukraine now faces a critical shortage of manpower, but the mobilisation of more young people would have a serious effect on Ukraine’s struggling economy. Ukraine now desperately needs to convince Western supporters that its cause is still worth the money. However, a large number of British analysts suggest that Ukraine may be forced to negotiate an end to the fighting and will have to make concessions that would allow Russia to remain in control of much of the territory it has occupied. In the eyes of the West, it would be a disastrous setback for all of Europe as it would reward Russia for its aggression. But few people in Britain now believe that Ukraine is strong enough to regain all its territory, including Crimea, lost since 2014.

Ukraine’s cause has been helped, however, by the public outrage over the death of Alexei Navalny. Western leaders are now saying this amounted to his murder in his Arctic prison camp by Russia’s security services. All British politicians have denounced President Putin’s clamp-down on all free expression, his increasingly dictatorial policies and the return to Stalinism throughout Russian society. Britain’s relations with Russia are now in a deep freeze. In response to Navalny’s death, Britain and other European allies have announced new sanctions on Russia, especially targeting those in Russia’s security services and anyone who had responsibility for Navalny’s death.

These sanctions are largely only symbolic gestures of outrage that reflect Britain’s growing disgust at how Russia is now governed. They will have little real effect on Russia. President Putin dismissed the new sanctions with contempt and announced retaliatory measures on EU officials – although none of them have any intention of visiting Russia at the moment. The White House has also promised further measures against Moscow.

But neither Washington nor other NATO allies have committed themselves to a measure that would indeed hurt Russia: the seizure of all Russian sovereign assets and their transfer to Ukraine. These assets, worth about $300 billion, would certainly help to pay for the huge cost of rebuilding Ukraine. But until now, the West has been reluctant to take this step. Various reasons have been given. It would lead to the immediate Russian seizure of all Western assets and investments in Russia. It would set a precedent for other authoritarian governments in the world to do the same in any disputes with the West. It runs the risk of unfairly hurting innocent or exiled Russians who are opposed to the Ukraine war. And it violates international law, especially the concept of “sovereign immunity”.

None of these objections has any real force, however. Western businesses have largely written off their holdings in Russia. By its aggression, Moscow has violated all legal norms. Moreover, a similar measure has been employed previously, during the first Gulf War, when Iraqi assets overseas were confiscated to punish Saddam Hussein’s aggression and fund the reconstruction of Kuwait.

Rishi Sunak, Britain’s prime minister, has said he would favour seizing Russian assets. But other European leaders are still hesitating and have not agreed to this step. They all agree, however, that sanctions alone will not force Russia to halt its aggression. This is because Moscow has been able to avoid the effects of most sanctions, finding ways to trade without using the dollar, exporting most of its oil to India and China, and finding the components Russian industry needs in countries such as Turkey and Kazakhstan, where there are no sanctions on trade with Russia.

On the second anniversary of the invasion, NATO countries have underlined the urgent need for the West to step up its own defence budget and to prepare for possible direct conflict with Russia. NATO has just held one of its biggest exercises in Eastern Europe, and the Baltic states have hugely increased their defence budgets. The difficulty now comes in supplying Ukraine with the arms and ammunition it needs. Most Western countries have already given those arms that they had in reserve, and European defence industries have not yet restocked Western arsenals. Britain and other European nations are now critically short of weapons, aircraft, tanks and ammunition and need to resupply their own armies.

The big worry for most of NATO, and especially for Europe, is the upcoming American election. There is a growing mood of isolationism in the US, and Donald Trump has encouraged this. He is likely to be confirmed as the Republican presidential candidate and has spoken openly of his contempt for NATO and his determination not to pay for Europe’s defence. Indeed, he shocked all European defence ministries when he said during a recent campaign rally that he would encourage Russia to do “what the hell it wanted” in any NATO member that had not paid its full share of the alliance costs. This was denounced in the US as highly irresponsible and an encouragement to President Putin. But it may well become US policy if Trump wins the election.

There is a realisation in Western Europe that any extra help for Ukraine must come as soon as possible, and certainly before the US election in November. But as the campaign becomes more intense, the Biden administration will also probably draw back from further support for Ukraine, as the issue is not a popular one with US voters now.

Ukraine is the biggest and bloodiest conflict on the European continent since 1945 and has taken more Russian and Ukrainian lives than any other war fought since the Second World War. Sadly, although the West’s determination to repel Russian aggression remains very strong, most European voters are not now prepared to pay the full cost of doing so.

This is Articte sidebar