Europe’s security will be decided in Ukraine – What must be done now

A war critical for Europe’s future

Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine is a direct challenge to Europe’s security. Russian drones have repeatably breached NATO airspace, demon­strating that the threat is al-ready here. As European countries grapple with this new reality, LibMod’s annual Ukraine conference offered a forum for experts and policy­makers to discuss how Eu-rope and Ukraine can jointly develop stronger security policies. The central premise was clear: Ukraine is not just defending itself, it is shielding Europe from Russia.

European policy makers have long depicted support to Ukraine as an act of generosity. Now they gradually begin treating Ukraine as what it really is: a net security provider for the entire continent. By holding the line against Russia’s aggression, Ukraine is prevent-ing Moscow from carrying out its expan­sionist agenda in other parts of Europe as well. The war’s outcome will shape Europe’s future and determine whether inter­na­tional re-lations will be shaped by raw power politics or by a set of common rules.

Under­standing Russia’s imperial ambitions

Russia’s war aims are not limited to terri­torial conquest. The Kremlin’s strategy is rooted in imperial ambition, charac­terized by the conference’s keynote speaker, Ukrainian phi-losopher Volodymyr Yermolenko, as an “imperi­alism of assim­i­lation.” It denies Ukraine’s right to exist as a sovereign nation and its citizens the right to a Ukrainian identity. For Ukraine, therefore, this war is existential. For Europe, it is a test of resolve that will reveal whether democ­racies can defend themselves, or whether they will yield to revisionist aggression.

How far will Europe go to deter Russia?

The speakers discussed two different visions for Europe’s involvement in Ukraine:

• Keeping Russia in check by making the costs of a future Russian aggression pro-hibitively high.
• Denying Moscow the ability to strike again through deep penetration of Russian territory by special opera­tions, deep strikes and cognitive warfare that would prevent Russia from amassing the forces for a fresh aggression against Ukraine or any other European country.

Keeping Russia merely in check may offer short-term stability for other European coun-tries, but would inflict unbearably high costs, first and foremost on Ukraine, which would be forced into a perpetual state of siege – a “porcupine” armed to the teeth and being forced to constantly concen­trate all its resources on defence. The more ambi-tious but ultimately more sustainable goal would be to undermine Russia’s ability to wage war in order to ensure lasting security for Europe and Ukraine alike.

Disman­tling Russia’s war machine

To achieve this, Ukraine and its European backers need to work towards key capabilities:

• Techno­logical superi­ority: Develop deep-strike capabil­ities, such as drones with several thousand kilometres of range, to target Russian logistics and command centres.
• Asymmetric opera­tions: Scale special opera­tions and cognitive warfare to de-grade Russia’s military-indus­trial complex and cripple fuel and explo­sives production. Kinetic sanctions are the most effective.
• Indus­trial mobilization: Europe must become the arsenal of Ukraine’s defence, supplying weapons and other capabil­ities to hold off and possibly defeat Russia on the battle­field. Germany, in particular, should lead at home and by forming coali­tions of the willing and the able with other states, bypassing bureau­cratic delays to act decisively.

Funding and scaling up defence innova­tions and building indus­trial capacities

Financial and indus­trial support is the backbone of Ukraine’s defence. Ukraine, lacking personnel, has proven its ability to innovate: unmanned systems, electronic warfare, and rapid adaptation have become hallmarks of its resis­tance. Europe must match this with its own investment in next-gener­ation technologies and use its indus­trial base to scale up Ukrainian made defence innova­tions for the frontline.

• Joint ventures can be a way to integrating Ukraine’s indus­trial capacity into Europe’s defence ecosystem.
• Speed is critical. Delays in decision-making and procurement cost lives. Europe should develop faster supply lines and procurement channels and share more of the investment risks.

Commu­ni­cating the stakes to society

As Member of the German Bundestag, Agnieszka Brugger, said during the conference’s second panel: “Not standing up to aggression, but not even naming the aggressor, is an invitation for more attacks.” Public support hinges on trans­parency. Scandi­navian and Baltic models, rooted in honesty about threats and realistic assess­ments of risks, can be an example, if not a blueprint. In our commu­ni­cation we must confront fears with honesty and realism, guided by the principle: “To be alert in order not to be anxious.” In the end electorates prefer hearing the true extent of threats over being kept in the dark for their peace of mind.

The cost of inaction

Russia’s ambitions extend far beyond subju­gating Ukraine. Failure to act decisively now risks embold­ening further aggression, further eroding the rules-based order, and frac-turing European unity.

As Ralf Fücks, the director of LibMod, stated: We must redefine realism – not as the mere preser­vation of the status quo, but as the courage to recognize that appeasement will not make Russia’s threat disappear. The realistic approach today means accepting that Russia must be defeated. This is also the prereq­uisite for political change in Rus-sia: it can only get rid of its imperial agenda if it fails in Ukraine. We must take bolder action: secure political majorities, set clear objec­tives alongside Ukraine, and stop looking for quick fixes at the cost of Ukraine’s sover­eignty and Eu-rope’s security.

In the words of Ukrainian philosopher Volodymyr Yermolenko – “Democ­racies must be capable of fighting back. The forces of good need not – and should not – be powerless.”