Russia will demand that Ukraine cut its ties with NATO and become “a neutral state with a limited military” during talks with U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, Bloomberg reported on Jan. 15, citing its sources.

Trump has previously signaled that he is ready to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin “very quickly” following his inauguration, adding that the Kremlin is also seeking it. Trump has repeatedly reiterated that he plans to end the war in Ukraine swiftly, in part because he allegedly has good ties with Putin.

The Kremlin reportedly accepts that individual NATO member states can continue to send weapons to Ukraine as part of bilateral security agreements, but the weapons “should not be used against Russia or to recapture territory,” one of the sources told Bloomberg.

Moscow’s position is that it will de facto retain control over almost 20% of Ukraine’s territory, including the Crimean peninsula, annexed in 2014. In the meantime, Russia is allegedly open to exchange some territories, the media outlet reported, citing its sources.

Kyiv and Moscow are currently holding talks only on the exchange of prisoners and the return of deported children, Ukrainian officials told the media outlet on condition of anonymity.

Meanwhile, Ukraine and Russia are also having “limited talks” in Qatar on the rules for protecting nuclear facilities from attacks, Bloomberg reported, citing a person familiar with the Kremlin’s preparations.

Trump has often voiced sympathies for the Russian leader while criticizing the level of support the outgoing Biden administration threw behind Kyiv. This prompted concerns that the new U.S. leadership might cut a deal unfavorable to Ukraine.

Trump’s incoming peace envoy for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg, said that the president-elect’s aim is not to “give something to Putin or the Russians” but to “save Ukraine and save their sovereignty."

Trump said that specific peace proposals are still being worked out. A pitch leaked from his team — freezing the front lines, postponing Ukraine’s NATO accession by 20 years, and deploying European peacekeepers on the ground — has already been rejected by Russia.

Will Europe put ‘boots on the ground’ for peace in Ukraine? We asked top Nordic, Baltic officials

Just days out from the return of Donald Trump to the White House, the future of Russia’s war against Ukraine is dominated by a great unknown: whether the incoming president will manage to push Moscow to stop its advance on the battlefield, or whether he will disengage and perhaps

The Kyiv IndependentFrancis Farrell

Key developments on Jan. 15:

• Ukraine’s military now totals 880,000 soldiers, facing 600,000 Russian troops, Zelensky says
• Russia launches mass missile attack against Ukraine
• Ukraine, Russia have to make concessions to end war, Rubio says
• Ukraine brings back 25 people from Russian captivity, including Azovstal defenders
• Lithuania would consider troop deployment to Ukraine upon Kyiv’s request, FM Budrys says
• NATO defense budget could surpass Russia’s tenfold if Europe matches Poland’s spending, Tusk says

President Volodymyr Zelensky said on Jan. 15 that Ukraine’s military now comprises 880,000 soldiers, tasked with defending the entire country against 600,000 Russian troops concentrated in specific areas.

Speaking at a joint press conference with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk in Warsaw, Zelensky said that Russia’s localized troop concentration creates a numerical advantage.

“Russian troops are concentrated in several areas, so in some areas, they have a quantitative advantage,” he said.

Ukraine has been struggling with a manpower shortage, especially in the infantry, while Russia has intensified its offensive in Donetsk Oblast since the summer of 2024.

Earlier on Jan. 14, a scandal erupted in Ukraine as Air Force members claimed they were being transferred to bolster the infantry.

Join our community

Support independent journalism in Ukraine. Join us in this fight.

Support Us

According to Ukrainska Pravda, Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi issued an order on Jan. 11 to transfer over 5,000 Air Force personnel to Ground Forces units. A senior Air Force officer, speaking anonymously, said transfers began in spring 2024 and have now reached a "critical level," with unit staffing dropping to 50%.

The General Staff of Ukraine's Armed Forces denied claims of transferring technical and aviation personnel, saying that these resources are being increased.

Critics have called for deeper mobilization reforms, as Ukraine's army faces challenges related to demographics and an uneven mobilization process.

In 2024, Ukraine lowered its minimum mobilization age from 27 to 25 but resisted calls from international partners to reduce it further to 18.

Zelensky also reported progress in arms production, saying that Ukraine now covers 33-34% of its annual weapons needs — up from less than 10% before the full-scale invasion. Europe and the U.S. supply more than 60% of Ukraine's weaponry, with each accounting for about 30%.

Russia launches mass missile attack against Ukraine

Russia launched a large-scale missile attack against Ukraine on the morning of Jan. 15, using Kh-101, Kh-22, and Kalibr cruise missiles, Ukraine's Air Force reported.

The Russian Defense Ministry had previously threatened to retaliate after Ukraine targeted military and industrial sites throughout Russia in a mass attack on Jan. 14.

Ukraine's Air Force issued a nationwide aerial alert in the early hours of Jan. 15, following warnings that a group of Tu-95MS strategic bombers had taken flight from Russia's Olenya airfield in Murmansk Oblast.

Russia also reportedly launched ballistic missiles from Belgorod Oblast.

Explosions were reported in Kharkiv, Khmelnytsky Oblast, and Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast. In Lviv Oblast, Lviv Mayor Andrii Sadovyi said Russian forces had "attacked the energy infrastructure of our region and Ukraine."

Later in the morning of Jan. 15, officials in Lviv Oblast said critical infrastructure facilities had been hit in two districts of the oblast but added there were no casualties. There was no information on what was hit or the extent of the damage caused.

Svitlana Onyshchuk, head of Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast Military Administration, said the attacks had targeted "critical infrastructure facilities" in the oblast but had not caused any casualties. No further details were provided.

Ukraine's state grid operator, Ukrenergo, imposed emergency blackouts as a preventative measure, Energy Minister Herman Haluschenko announced.

"It's the middle of winter, and the target for the Russians remains the same: our energy sector," President Volodymyr Zelensky wrote on his Telegram channel later in the morning on Jan. 15.

"More than 40 missiles were involved in this strike, including ballistic missiles. At least 30 were destroyed. There were also more than 70 Russian attack drones overnight," he added.

"We constantly need to strengthen the existing capabilities of the Ukrainian air shield. Our partners at the NATO summit in Washington and in the Ramstein format made promises that have not yet been fully realized."

Shortly after eight in the morning, the all-clear was given across much of the country.

Poland scrambled fighter jets due to the Russian missile threat in western Ukraine, according to the Polish Operational Command.

Why Ukraine’s long-delayed missile production ambitions have yet to get off the ground

The Ukrainian government in recent months has been aggressively touting fresh developments in its missile-making. President Volodymyr Zelensky announced that the country had built 100 of its own missiles in 2024 as of November. He called for 3,000 “cruise missiles or missile-drones” to be manufactu…

The Kyiv IndependentKollen Post

Ukraine, Russia have to make concessions to end war, Rubio says

Both Ukraine and Russia will have to make concessions to end the war, Marco Rubio, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's pick for secretary of state, said on Jan. 15 at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Rubio called on everyone to be realistic, suggesting that Russia's concession would be to not advance any further, while Ukraine's concession would be to give its territories currently under Russian occupation.

"It is important for everyone to be realistic: There will have to be concessions — made by the Russian Federation, but also by the Ukrainians… It is also important that there be some balance on both sides," Rubio said.

Since invading Ukraine in 2014 and escalating its war of aggression in 2022, Russia has occupied about 20% of Ukrainian territory, imposing repressive measures on the local population and prohibiting any expressions of Ukrainian identity. Ukraine has repeatedly said it would not recognize its territory currently under Moscow's control as Russian.

Trump, who takes office on Jan. 20, repeatedly pledged during his election campaign to negotiate a swift end to the war after taking office. However, he has never elaborated on how exactly he plans to achieve that.

"There is no way Russia takes all of Ukraine. The Ukrainians are too brave and fight too hard, and the country is too big. That's not gonna happen," Rubio said.

"It is also unrealistic to believe that somehow a nation the size of Ukraine… gonna push these people (Russian troops) all the way back to where they were on the eve of the invasion," he added.

According to Rubio, the U.S. must not allow Russian President Vladimir Putin to return to his plans to take over Ukraine in four or five years.

Rubio publicly praised the bravery of Ukrainian defenders but was among the 15 Republican lawmakers in the Senate who voted against the $61 billion aid package for Ukraine, which was eventually passed in April 2024.

Rubio did not support President Joe Biden's administration's policy regarding assistance to Ukraine, as, according to him, the White House "has never been clear about how this conflict will end."

The 53-year-old Florida Senator will replace Antony Blinken in the position, and as the top U.S. diplomat, he would be at the forefront of potential peace negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow.

How will the Russia-Ukraine war end? The good, the bad, and the ugly scenarios

Editor’s note: This article is based on a publicly available research report on scenarios for the end of Russia’s war on Ukraine by KI Insights, the Kyiv Independent’s research unit. Read Francis Farrell’s full report here. After nearly three years of heavy battles and mass strikes, Russia’s

The Kyiv IndependentFrancis Farrell

Ukraine brings back 25 people from Russian captivity, including Azovstal defenders

Ukraine managed to bring back 25 Ukrainians from Russian captivity, including Azovstal defenders, President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on Jan. 15.

"Returning our people home is something that Ukraine is constantly working on. And we will not stop until we bring all of our people back," Zelensky said in a post on Telegram.

The returning Ukrainian POWs were captured during the defense of Mariupol and its Azovstal steel plant, as well as during the defense of other key areas of the front line in Kharkiv, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson oblasts, Zelensky added.

He said some of those brought back have serious injuries and illnesses.

The exchange was conducted on a 25 for 25 basis.

In a recent agreement, Russia and Ukraine agreed to prioritize wounded POWs at the selection of exchanges, followed by those held longest in captivity.

President Zelensky also expressed his gratitude to the United Arab Emirates for mediating between the parties.

Over the past year, Ukraine conducted 11 prisoner exchanges and secured the return of 356 more people than in 2023. Since the start of the full-scale invasion, Nearly 4,000 people have been released, including 1,358 in 2024.

As Russian losses in Ukraine mount, Putin faces ‘devastating’ demographic timebomb

Russian losses in Ukraine are helping fuel a demographic timebomb that could see the country’s population reduced by half by the end of the century, experts have told the Kyiv Independent. “The impact on Russian society is devastating,” said Harley Balzer, emeritus professor of government and inter…

The Kyiv IndependentChris York

Lithuania would consider troop deployment to Ukraine upon Kyiv's request, FM Budrys says

Vilnius would consider deploying troops to Ukraine with its allies in the future if Kyiv were to make such a request, Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys told LRT TV on Jan. 14.

The proposal for an international peacekeeping force has gained traction recently, as European nations prepare to take a more prominent role in Ukraine's defense when U.S. President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20.

Budrys said that Lithuania did not rule out such possibilities which were touted at a summit in Paris last year when French President Emmanuel Macron invited Lithuania's president and others to explore expanded military involvement in Ukraine.

"Lithuania is a security provider in the region, not just a recipient," Budrys said. "If the question arises, I have no doubt that the Lithuanian flag will be there."

"We'd talk with our allies and partners about what it looks like, and we'd talk with Ukraine about what it looks like," he added.

Macron has championed the idea of deploying European troops in Ukraine since early 2024.

President Volodymyr Zelensky and Macron discussed the possibility during a meeting on Dec. 18, and Macron raised the proposal again during a trilateral meeting with Trump on Dec. 7. Trump reportedly expressed interest in European-led ceasefire monitoring.

On Jan. 13, Zelensky and Macron held a phone call to discuss Ukraine's air defense priorities and the possible deployment of peacekeepers. Both leaders agreed to meet soon to advance plans for securing guarantees for Ukraine.

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is also expected to visit Ukraine in the coming weeks to discuss the peacekeeping initiative, Bloomberg reported on Jan. 10.

Will Europe put ‘boots on the ground’ for peace in Ukraine? We asked top Nordic, Baltic officials

Just days out from the return of Donald Trump to the White House, the future of Russia’s war against Ukraine is dominated by a great unknown: whether the incoming president will manage to push Moscow to stop its advance on the battlefield, or whether he will disengage and perhaps

The Kyiv IndependentFrancis Farrell

NATO defense budget could surpass Russia’s tenfold if Europe matches Poland’s spending, Tusk says

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk advocated for increased defense spending across NATO on Jan. 15, arguing that if all European members matched Poland's spending, NATO's defense budget would be ten times that of Russia's.

"No one but Europe will solve its defense problems," he said during a joint press conference with President Volodymyr Zelensky in Warsaw.

Tusk's comment comes amid growing calls for higher defense spending across NATO, a topic reignited by Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and advocated for by incoming U.S. President Donald Trump.

"Other countries should not pay 1.5 percent of their GDP for defense — this is not enough," he said, emphasizing that robust European defense contributions could help maintain friendly U.S.-European relations.

On Jan. 7, Trump called for NATO's spending target to rise to 5% of GDP, significantly higher than the current 2% goal.

"If all European countries start taking their obligations in NATO seriously, I am sure America will be happy to cooperate with us," Tusk added.

While the 5% suggestion has faced resistance, some NATO members are reportedly open to a more modest increase, potentially to 3% of GDP, Reuters reported on Jan. 10.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte quipped on Jan. 13 that allies should increase spending or prepare to "take Russian language courses or move to New Zealand." Currently, 24 out of 32 NATO countries meet the 2% GDP target, but several, including Italy, Canada, and Spain, fall short.

Zelensky praised his discussions with Tusk, highlighting their focus on bolstering Ukraine's defense capabilities and advancing sanctions against Russia.

"We discussed our defense, including the supply of weapons, weapons production, and related investments. We also focused on strengthening sanctions against Russia and bringing peace closer for Ukraine and all of Europe," Zelensky said on X.

Putin’s war economy is running on fumes as inflation and shortages surge

Russian President Vladimir Putin frequently boasts about the strength of his country’s economy, claiming that Western sanctions only made it stronger (while in the same breath demanding that they be lifted). In fact, “stagflation” — inflation combined with minimal growth — is coming to Russia. His w…

The Kyiv IndependentAnders Åslund

Both Ukraine and Russia will have to make concessions to end the war, Marco Rubio, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of state, said on Jan. 15 at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Rubio called on everyone to be realistic, suggesting that Russia’s concession would be to not advance any further, while Ukraine’s concession would be to give its territories currently under Russian occupation.

“It is important for everyone to be realistic: There will have to be concessions — made by the Russian Federation, but also by the Ukrainians… It is also important that there be some balance on both sides,” Rubio said.

Since invading Ukraine in 2014 and escalating its war of aggression in 2022, Russia has occupied about 20% of Ukrainian territory, imposing repressive measures on the local population and prohibiting any expressions of Ukrainian identity. Ukraine has repeatedly said it would not recognize its territory currently under Moscow’s control as Russian.

Trump, who takes office on Jan. 20, repeatedly pledged during his election campaign to negotiate a swift end to the war after taking office. However, he has never elaborated on how exactly he plans to achieve that.

“There is no way Russia takes all of Ukraine. The Ukrainians are too brave and fight too hard, and the country is too big. That’s not gonna happen,” Rubio said.

“It is also unrealistic to believe that somehow a nation the size of Ukraine… gonna push these people (Russian troops) all the way back to where they were on the eve of the invasion,” he added.

According to Rubio, the U.S. must not allow Russian President Vladimir Putin to return to his plans to take over Ukraine in four or five years.

Rubio publicly praised the bravery of Ukrainian defenders but was among the 15 Republican lawmakers in the Senate who voted against the $61 billion aid package for Ukraine, which was eventually passed in April 2024.

Rubio did not support President Joe Biden’s administration’s policy regarding assistance to Ukraine, as, according to him, the White House “has never been clear about how this conflict will end."

The 53-year-old Florida Senator will replace Antony Blinken in the position, and as the top U.S. diplomat, he would be at the forefront of potential peace negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow.

Marco Rubio’s stance on Russia’s war in Ukraine — what we know

Republican Senator Marco Rubio is likely to be the next U.S. secretary of state, according to reports on Nov. 12 that mark the latest insight into how President-elect Donald Trump’s White House will approach Russia’s war in Ukraine. Trump, leader of the Republican party who was elected president on

The Kyiv IndependentChris York

The U.S. Treasury Department has targeted actors involved in a sanctions evasion scheme facilitating cross-border payments for sensitive goods between China and Russia as part of a new package of sanctions, according to a Jan. 15 announcement.

The U.S. Treasury imposed new sanctions on a total of over 150 entities and individuals, including companies in Russia’s defense industry and those supporting it, as well as dozens of entities across multiple countries that help Russia evade U.S. sanctions.

The Treasury also expanded measures against almost 100 entities already under sanctions for their cooperation with Russia’s military-industrial complex.

“Today’s actions frustrate the Kremlin’s ability to circumvent our sanctions and get access to the goods they need to build weapons for their war of choice in Ukraine,” said Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Treasury Wally Adeyemo.

Moscow and Beijing set up regional clearing platforms (RCPs) in both Russia and China to act as counterparties for cross-border payments for sensitive goods. This allows for non-cash mutual payments for sanctioned goods, according to the Treasury.

The Russian-Chinese scheme involves Russian financial institutions on the U.S. sanctions list, such as Public Joint Stock Company Sberbank of Russia, Joint Stock Company Alfa-Bank, Open Joint Stock Company Sovcombank, T-Bank, and Limited Liability Company Bank Tochka.

The sanctions also target OJSC Keremet Bank, based in Kyrgyzstan, which has been coordinating with Russian officials and Promsvyazbank, a Russian bank under U.S. sanctions, to evade sanctions since the summer of 2024.

In 2024, the Kyrgyz Finance Ministry sold a controlling stake in Keremet Bank to a firm closely linked to Russian-Moldovan oligarch Ilan Shor, who has ties to the Russian government.

The purchase of Keremet Bank was intended to create a hub for circumventing sanctions through which Russia could pay for imports and receive payments for exports, according to the statement.

The new sanctions also target 20 Russian energy companies and over 30 organizations and institutions from the defense and related sectors.

Earlier on Jan. 10, the U.S. and U.K. imposed broad sanctions against the Russian oil industry, taking aim at Moscow’s so-called “shadow fleet.” The restrictions targeted nearly 200 vessels, along with Russian oil companies and industry officials.

President Volodymyr Zelensky praised the sanctions as a “significant blow to the financial foundation of Russia’s war machine."

Putin’s war economy is running on fumes as inflation and shortages surge

Russian President Vladimir Putin frequently boasts about the strength of his country’s economy, claiming that Western sanctions only made it stronger (while in the same breath demanding that they be lifted). In fact, “stagflation” — inflation combined with minimal growth — is coming to Russia. His w…

The Kyiv IndependentAnders Åslund

Just days out from the return of Donald Trump to the White House, the future of Russia’s war against Ukraine is dominated by a great unknown: whether the incoming president will manage to push Moscow to stop its advance on the battlefield, or whether he will disengage and perhaps abandon U.S. support for Ukraine entirely.

Either way, one thing is clear: the war cannot come to an end with a secure Ukraine without Europe playing a braver role.

The chance of the guns and drones going silent across Ukraine in 24 hours after Trump takes office — as Trump had frequently promised on the campaign trail — is slim to none.

Nonetheless, amid consistent rhetoric from Washington that Europe must up defense spending and take more responsibility for their continent’s security, European countries are faced with an urgent task: taking the braver steps to secure Ukraine against a bullish Moscow seemingly more convinced in its forthcoming victory than at any time since February 2022.

In a new reality far removed from the war of 2022, the catch phrase going into 2025 is now “boots on the ground.”

The first serious floating of the idea of European troops entering Ukrainian territory came from French President Emmanuel Macron in the spring of 2024.

“In fact, many countries said that in the weeks that followed that they understood our approach, that they agreed with our position and that this position was a good thing.”

Media coverage of hypothetical European “boots on the ground” is often presented in the context of a peacekeeping force entering Ukrainian territory after a hypothetical peace deal.

While clear that larger players like France, Poland, or the U.K. would need to be involved, and that it is hard to imagine a new level of European action without the backing of the incoming U.S. administration, the role of smaller countries in the Nordic and Baltic states also looks to be critical.

Consistently among the top providers of military aid to Kyiv as a percentage of GDP, countries like Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have also been the most outspoken in their support for Ukrainian victory, beyond the tired repetitions of “as long as it takes.”

Recent alleged Russian sabotage attacks in the Baltic Sea, including the damaging of undersea cables running between Nordic and Baltic states, have served as a reminder that Russia’s war is not limited to Ukrainian territory.

The Kyiv Independent spoke to top officials, experts, and other stakeholders in some of Ukraine’s top European partners to take the pulse of countries that could be part of a new “coalition of the willing” in their support of Ukraine in 2025.

Voices of clarity

Before facing up to Trump, let alone Putin, the first major hurdle European countries must overcome is their own mindset, according to Jukka Kopra, chair of the Finnish parliament’s defense committee.

“Finland has always taken defense seriously. So we have a conscription system. We have a large reserve-based army,” Kopra said to the Kyiv Independent in Helsinki.

“Nobody’s ever ready for war, but we have things in order. We take it seriously, unlike some other countries who only have things working on paper.”

Although relatively small in terms of hard geopolitical sway, since the launch of Russia’s full-scale invasion, the countries immediately bordering Russia have often found themselves in the role of activist, pushing Ukraine’s crystal-clear message that peace must come through strength in the NATO arena.

“One might think that when the escalated aggression started in February 2022, everybody’s eyes would open,” said Kopra. “They are opening slowly, but not everywhere.”

Of all NATO member states, none show more clarity than the Baltic States, where the memory of Soviet occupation and the totalitarian repression that came with it remains fresh.

Only recently stepping down after his country’s last elections, former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrelius Landsbergis has been one the most eloquent pro-Ukrainian voices among foreign officials.

“Appeasement is a recurring virus; the seasons vary in how often it does reoccur in Europe, but it always comes back,” said Landsbergis to the Kyiv Independent.

“The logic is always the same. I am the person who can appease, who can offer part of some other country to a dictator and all of us will be fine. It's so iconic when you see Chamberlain resurrected in 2024 in Europe and picking up the phone and saying, ‘I have this.’”

Landsbergis wasn’t the only Baltic minister to mention the infamous British prime minister, who had signed the Munich Agreement with Nazi Germany less than a year before Adolf Hitler invaded Poland.

“If it is a Chamberlain peace, it will be the start of more and more aggression,” said Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsakhna to the Kyiv Independent in Tallinn. “Now, we have every opportunity to avoid everything that came after 1938: World War II. This is not only about Europe, it is about the world order.”

A coalition of the willing?

As clear as the rhetoric of the Nordics and Baltics has been, taking braver steps still requires the leadership of countries with more weight to throw around.

“These conversations have matured,” said French security expert Leonie Allard to the Kyiv Independent. “But you need much more political weight from other Europeans, which we haven't seen so much.”

Germany, traditionally cautious but still the second-largest provider of military aid to Ukraine, looks to be completely absorbed by upcoming federal elections in February, while France’s government collapsed in December.

These countries that have traditionally been the leaders of Europe, they are kind of incapable at the moment,” said Kopra, “and what a coincidence it is, what a good position for the Kremlin.”

Still, the clear choice to take the lead is Paris, said Allard, who co-authored a recent paper published by the Atlantic Council entitled “Europe needs a coalition of the resolute.”

Macron brings with him to the table personal experience dealing with both Putin and Trump, which could be crucial in coordinating a braver European bloc.

“France cannot do anything on its own, nothing at all,” said Allard, “it's also up to other Europeans to, you know, take this opportunity to put forward their own ideas on what they want to do.”

The other obvious candidate to strengthen such a coalition would be Poland, the nation with the most to lose in national security from an abandonment of neighboring Ukraine.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has denied reports claiming he discussed deploying troops to Ukraine with Macron, as Warsaw sticks closely to a doctrine of beefing up its military to defend NATO borders.

Still, the possibility of Poland changing its tune shouldn’t be ruled out, said Allard.

“What other war is NATO preparing for apart from one with Russia?” she said. “There's only one thing, and if that thing means being in Ukraine, then it should be being in Ukraine. There is no other scenario.”

“Whatever the solution is to the present situation in the war between Ukraine and Russia,” said Kopra, “in any case, we are back in the Cold War, and all of Europe should start accelerating accordingly.”

Boots on the ground

Since the launch of Russia’s full-scale invasion, Kyiv has stressed that Ukraine doesn’t need foreign militaries to join the fight: the West only needs to provide the weaponry and ammunition, and Ukraine will do the job.

When it comes to direct combat with Russian forces, this position hasn’t changed, but with a dangerous and unpredictable outlook for the war in 2025, other versions of “boots on the ground” are being explored to improve Ukraine’s position.

A starting point often discussed is training. If conducted far from the front line, moving the existing overseas training programs into Ukrainian territory would not only make them more efficient, but send a strong signal to Moscow that the West will not just retreat to NATO’s eastern flank.

Speaking to the Kyiv Independent in Stockholm, Swedish Defense Minister Pal Jonson pointed out that representatives of his country’s defense procurement agency were already on the ground in Ukraine, and that Sweden wouldn’t rule out training Ukrainian troops on Ukrainian territory.

“We think it's good if we can find unity on this, there are ongoing discussions in several different places in Europe,” he said.

According to Landsbergis, a move for European countries to begin training Ukrainian soldiers inside Ukraine could be the first step in a series of careful moves that will slowly but surely up the deterrence factor for Moscow.

“If they're trained in Ukraine, imagine that where troops are trained, the areas are defended with additional air defense support. You bring Lithuanian and French troops, the French bring in the air defense, and we start covering parts of Ukrainian territory.”

Nonetheless, for now, the majority of attention has been on the use of European troops as a physical security guarantee, as expressed by Zelensky after his calls with Macron.

After a tough two years of attritional warfare which saw a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive in 2023 and a steadily worsening manpower crisis, the fading perspective of a complete Ukrainian victory has turned attention to the need for peace to come with hard guarantees against a repeat Russian invasion.

Trump and his team, many of whom publicly subscribe to the myth that “NATO expansion” was one of the main causes of Russia’s war against Ukraine, have spoken strongly against inviting Kyiv to the alliance, an offer that sat at the top of Zelensky’s victory plan as presented to partners in October.

“What are these security guarantees in real life? Are they peacekeeping missions, military missions? Our point is very clear: NATO membership for Ukraine is the most secure, most clear, most efficient, and cheapest way to give real security guarantees. Any other structure is much more complicated.”

“There are four countries that gave security guarantees for Ukraine (in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum). One of them attacked Ukraine ― Russia ― and the three others are not fulfilling that agreement.”

“Currently, NATO is not ready to enter the war,” said Braze, “because the clear concept is that Ukraine's self-defense is supported, everybody provides what is necessary, but nobody wants to be part of the war, fighting the war.”

Though not as physically threatened by Russia as the Nordics or Baltics, France’s leading role in a future troop deployment makes a lot of sense due to the organization of its military and recent experience, said Allard.

“France is the country that has an army structure that's based a lot on expeditionary forces, used to send forces abroad,” she said, pointing to a wealth of recent French experience operating in the Sahel region in Africa.

Once the time comes for deployment, it is very unlikely that European troops could be stationed along the contact line itself, as sometimes broached in visions of a so-called “demilitarized zone.”

What is more realistic, said Allard, is the deployment of European forces in bases further back, with the explicit purpose of acting as a so-called “tripwire force,” with the explicit purpose of making any further Russian aggression in Ukraine immediately come at the cost of direct conflict with NATO.

“The size and the ability of this tripwire force to weigh on Ukraine security would be dependent on the level of lethality that we find ourselves in, in a situation of a deal.”

Ultimately, in the absence of NATO membership for Ukraine, “boots on the ground” might just be the kind of ad-hoc measure that is enough to deter an aging, weakened Putin from launching a repeat invasion.

“It changes Putin's calculations,” said Landsbergis of the tripwire effect, “because as President Macron clearly said, Putin will have to keep in mind that if you enter Odesa, you will find French troops.”

Waiting for Trump

As much as real discussions might be ongoing among a potential future European “coalition of the willing,” even the most basic public specifics are still lacking.

The reason for indecisiveness and delay is one person, Trump, but even more so, said Allard, is the looming anticipation of the results of his first steps for ending the war.

“We're waiting for the U.S. to put forward the terms of the potential negotiations,” she said, “since it's their view — that of the Trump team — and try to help Ukraine to also be able to shape that. But if this goes forward, Europeans are ready to take on more responsibility.”

With Russia publicly rejecting early attempts at drawing up a tentative peace deal, Trump’s incoming envoy for peace in Ukraine, retired General Keith Kellogg, has named 100 days as his personal target to reach a deal.

“The coin is still in the air, right? We don't know which side it will land on,” said Landsbergis of Trump’s approach to Putin upon inauguration.

“I think it's rather black and white, right? It's impossible that it lands on a situation which would be comfortable for both, for Ukrainians and Russians. That means that if you give something to Putin, that will be his victory and Ukrainian loss.”

In the meantime though, argues Allard, the last thing Europe should do is sit idle. If wants to weigh on Putin's decision to enter negotiations, Europe should try to move forward with a developed public position on troops in Ukraine now, she said.

“It's now that we, Europeans, should prepare and form this notion and not after a negotiation.”

How will the Russia-Ukraine war end? The good, the bad, and the ugly scenarios

Editor’s note: This article is based on a publicly available research report on scenarios for the end of Russia’s war on Ukraine by KI Insights, the Kyiv Independent’s research unit. Read Francis Farrell’s full report here. After nearly three years of heavy battles and mass strikes, Russia’s

The Kyiv IndependentFrancis Farrell

After numerous attempts, Ukrainian forces operating in Russia’s Kursk Oblast have finally captured two North Korean soldiers. President Volodymyr Zelensky called this “irrefutable evidence” of Pyongyang’s involvement in the Kremlin’s full-scale war against Ukraine. One of the two soldiers was taken prisoner by Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces. Watch this video to find out why capturing North Korean soldiers is so challenging — and how Ukrainian forces ultimately succeeded.

President Volodymyr Zelensky said on Jan. 15 that Ukraine’s military now comprises 880,000 soldiers, tasked with defending the entire country against 600,000 Russian troops concentrated in specific areas.

Speaking at a joint press conference with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk in Warsaw, Zelensky said that Russia’s localized troop concentration creates a numerical advantage.

“Russian troops are concentrated in several areas, so in some areas, they have a quantitative advantage,” he said.

Ukraine has been struggling with a manpower shortage, especially in the infantry, while Russia has intensified its offensive in Donetsk Oblast since the summer of 2024.

Earlier on Jan. 14, a scandal erupted in Ukraine as Air Force members claimed they were being transferred to bolster the infantry.

According to Ukrainska Pravda, Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi issued an order on Jan. 11 to transfer over 5,000 Air Force personnel to Ground Forces units. A senior Air Force officer, speaking anonymously, said transfers began in spring 2024 and have now reached a “critical level,” with unit staffing dropping to 50%.

The General Staff of Ukraine’s Armed Forces denied claims of transferring technical and aviation personnel, saying that these resources are being increased.

Critics have called for deeper mobilization reforms, as Ukraine’s army faces challenges related to demographics and an uneven mobilization process.

In 2024, Ukraine lowered its minimum mobilization age from 27 to 25 but resisted calls from international partners to reduce it further to 18.

Zelensky also reported progress in arms production, saying that Ukraine now covers 33-34% of its annual weapons needs — up from less than 10% before the full-scale invasion. Europe and the U.S. supply more than 60% of Ukraine’s weaponry, with each accounting for about 30%.

Polish PM accuses Russia of planning ‘air terror,’ condemns sabotage efforts

“These acts of sabotage are versions of the war that Russia has declared to the whole world, not just Ukraine,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said.

The Kyiv IndependentTim Zadorozhnyy

The Ukrainian government in recent months has been aggressively touting fresh developments in its missile-making.

President Volodymyr Zelensky announced that the country had built 100 of its own missiles in 2024 as of November. He called for 3,000 “cruise missiles or missile-drones” to be manufactured in 2025.

Traditional missiles are tricky. Ukraine’s notable successes in scaling up drone production were to a large degree a workaround of the country’s limits in defense industry autonomy. Russia and the West gutted Ukraine’s weapons factories after the fall of the USSR, with the help of local corruption. Those that remain are subject to constant Russian bombardment.

As a result, analysts call Zelensky’s figures and the claimed features of traditional missiles made at home an oversell.

“If Ukraine can only deliver half of what Zelensky promised at the end of 2024 in terms of missile and drone production, I will be very content. But that’s going to be challenging,” says Fabian Hoffmann, a missile expert and research fellow at the Oslo Nuclear Project.

Ukraine’s budding missile program joins a long tradition of metaphorical and literal saber-rattling between hostile armies. For the time being, the missiles have yet to prove themselves on the battlefield. The challenge for outside observers is in sorting out ballistics from bluster.

Here is what we know and can assess of the roster of Ukraine’s home-grown missiles today.

The Neptune, a nautical cruise missile

Originally designed to hit ships from coastal positions, the Neptune has been converted into a cruise missile that can be launched from land, per Ukrainian authorities. It is what Hoffmann calls “by far the most mature of these large missile projects.”

Ukrainian officials said it was a Neptune that struck and sank the Russian cruiser Moskva back in April 2022. An unnamed official told the War Zone that they had reconfigured the Neptune to strike and disable an S-400 Russian air defense battery back in August 2023.

Various Ukrainian Telegram channels cited anonymous sources saying that the Neptune was used to hit a Russian ammunition depot in Rostov Oblast on Jan. 11.

But evidence of Neptunes flying is largely limited to government statements or citations of unnamed officials. That is despite Zelensky touting that the Neptune had been “accepted into weaponry” in a speech to Ukraine’s Parliament all the way back in 2020.

“There were discussions that Ukraine would set up production for at least the anti-ship cruise missiles,” says Hoffmann.

“Initially we heard that they were very artisanaly producing them — just a couple per month at most, but there was not really a production line. But there was this assumption that Ukraine would be able to streamline that to some extent. And that obviously hasn’t happened, at least if we derive it from the rate of usage which really hasn’t seen any kind of uptick since 2023.”

Thunder 2, the ballistic variant

Distinct from the cruise missile Neptune, the Hrim 2 — or Thunder 2 in English — is a ballistic rocket program, based on solid fuel and inertial guidance and in theory reaching speeds several times that of sound.

Unlike a cruise missile, a ballistic missile goes far into the atmosphere, with many traveling at speeds many times that of sound.

The program goes back as far as 2006 under the name Sapsan, which at some point became the internal name, as opposed to the envisioned international export model, the Hrim 2.

Ukrainian officials said that the Hrim 2 finally passed testing toward the end of 2024, with Zelensky announcing “positive results” in August. The head of the permanent Ukrainian delegation to NATO, Yehor Cherniev, said of the Hrim 2s in October: “Here, believe me, there will soon be concrete results that not only Ukraine, but the Russian Federation will see.”

“I’m seeing test launch claims from last year but, eh,” says Michael Duitsman, a missile specialist at the Middlebury Institute in California, doubtfully, about the Hrim 2.

Korshun and Vilcha: Lost en route to market

Two projects, the Korshun and Vilcha — respectively a cruise missile and multiple-launch rocket system — were the subject of extensive press speculation in the mid- to late-2010s.

The Korshun was a cruise missile, a scale model of which was getting dragged around weapons conferences a decade ago. Despite being a cruise missile, one pro-Russian Telegram channel in 2017 named it as the basis for the Hrim 2. The Korshun project has effectively been shelved since Zelensky’s election.

The Vilcha is an updated Soviet rocket complex that promised to use modernized, Ukrainian-made rockets with higher precision than its predecessor. Despite appearing in Ukrainian military parades as far back as 2018, there’s been no evidence of a functional system playing a role since the full-scale invasion.

In the same speech in which he promised “concrete results” for the Hrim 2, Cherniev noted certain components of the Vilcha that “unfortunately, we won’t be able to get quickly,” without specifying what those components were.

Various other projects like the volunteer-based “Trembita” are described as “cruise missiles,” including in reports from the Economist and the Telegraph, but have nowhere near the speed, range, or payload to merit that title as it is generally understood, maxing out at 400 kilometers/hour, 200 kilometers, and 20 kilograms in each field, respectively..

“If you throw a rock fast enough you can call it a missile,” says James Acuna, a former naval architect and CIA officer in Eastern Europe, currently consulting on drone production from Estonia, about the Trembita.

Why a missile program is so hard to build

The main distinction between making classic cruise or ballistic missiles and, for example, Ukraine’s “missile-drones,” which the Trembita more closely resembles, is that the lighter and slower missile-drones can be made in smaller facilities with a far larger proportion of off-the-shelf commercial components.

The production of those more advanced engines, guidance systems, and fuel for more traditional missiles requires bigger permanent facilities and massively more precise engineering.

“This is like another level of science and engineering and physics,” says Acuna. “Ukraine does not currently have the military-industrial complex to make missiles. Can they make a good Frankenstein missile? Sure, they can do that, but is it going to take down a Kh-31?”

Designed during the USSR, the Kh-31 is an air-launched missile that hits Mach 3.5 and still sees regular use in the Russian military.

Duitsman for one doesn’t think the problem is Ukrainian technological savvy so much as Russian air attacks. “Once you get the basic industry down it’s not that hard, it just becomes immensely harder when someone is trying to bomb all of your factories.”

Unlike the small workshops in which Ukrainians can produce drones, the factories involved in missile production are massive and their locations well-known. Many Russians still alive once worked in them during the Soviet Union. For the duration of the war, Russian airstrikes have targeted them avidly.

In the first months of the war, Russia blew up a massive stockpile of solid rocket fuel in a chemical plant in Pavlohrad, on the western edge of the Donbas.

Following a Dec. 20 attack on Kyiv, the Russian Defense Ministry said it had hit “the construction bureau ‘Luch,’ which has accomplished planning and production of rocket complex ‘Neptune’ and the land-based guided rocket complex ‘Vilcha.’”

And on Jan. 8, Russia bombarded the Ukrainian city of Zaporizhzhia with glide bombs, resulting in the death of some 13 people and 113 more injured. Among the targeted areas, photos from the national police show damage to a “Motor Sich” factory that has long produced jet engines, including the MS400 Turbofan engines that at least at some point powered the Neptune.

Given such security threats it is not surprising that Ukraine has been secretive in details about its missile program. When reached, a representative for the Strategic Industries Ministry declined to comment, calling it “a sensitive subject.”

Still, little has been seen of these missiles in action, casting great doubt on Ukraine’s actual production. Mass use within Russia would almost certainly have ended up on social media via Russians under bombardment. Despite the secrecy, Ukraine is obviously eager to tout successes in these missile programs.

Why flaunt a missile program

The development of a local missile program would allow Ukraine to strike back at Russia directly, freed from Western terms for donated weaponry. Missiles have also become more intangible symbols of independence.

Eastern Ukraine was the heartland for much of the Soviet Union’s heavy industry. Yuzhnomash in Dnipro was the “largest ICBM factory in the world,” notes Duitsman.

After the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine’s missile production was dismantled and cannibalized. The government has spent 20 years claiming that a rocket renaissance is at hand.

Renamed to Pivdenmash — a shift from the Russian to Ukrainian word “pivden” meaning “south” — the same factory remains an epicenter of Ukraine’s weapons production, including the Hrim itself.

As with many such plants, Pivdenmash is a target for Russian missile attacks, including the infamous strike by Russia’s new Oreshnik on Nov. 21, an event that had many Western observers wringing their hands over the world’s first launch of an ICBM.

Ukraine is hardly alone in treating missiles as fonts of national pride. U.S. military sources were positively gleeful in touting the Patriot air defense missile’s success in shooting down Russia’s hypersonic Kinzhal in May 2023.

Russia has often bragged about weapons developments beyond their utility. The Russian Oreshnik that struck Pivdenmash in November, for example, was far less impressive than the headlines it managed to gather, says Duitsman.

The Oreshnik, he argues, was a fairly minor adaptation of a prior missile that was touted as novel based on the maker’s advertising and President Vladimir Putin’s sudden desire to cause a stir after the U.S. and U.K. permitted Ukraine to strike some Russian territory.

“States are not monoliths. Russia does not as a whole choose to pursue different missile programs,” says Duitsman.

“These are the results of conflicting political, military, industrial, and engineering goals. The Oreshnik does not necessarily make sense in a military context. It does make sense in the context of these missile design bureaus and missile production factories wanting a piece of the sweet sweet war money pie.”

Ukraine seems likewise to be overselling the tangible results of local missile development, Hoffmann says. “They have a vested interest in making it look like they’re doing well,” as Duitsman puts it.

How Ukraine’s new drone-missile hybrids are changing long-range weapon technology

Ukraine has turbo-charged its long-distance unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), making “rocket-drones” to compete with cruise missiles or save the trouble of asking for more Western-made ranged weapons. President Volodymyr Zelensky’s administration has been showing off the latest results, with videos…

The Kyiv IndependentKollen Post

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk advocated for increased defense spending across NATO on Jan. 15, arguing that if all European members matched Poland’s spending, NATO’s defense budget would be ten times that of Russia’s.

“No one but Europe will solve its defense problems,” he said during a joint press conference with President Volodymyr Zelensky in Warsaw.

Tusk’s comment comes amid growing calls for higher defense spending across NATO, a topic reignited by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and advocated for by incoming U.S. President Donald Trump.

“Other countries should not pay 1.5 percent of their GDP for defense — this is not enough,” he said, emphasizing that robust European defense contributions could help maintain friendly U.S.-European relations.

On Jan. 7, Trump called for NATO’s spending target to rise to 5% of GDP, significantly higher than the current 2% goal.

“If all European countries start taking their obligations in NATO seriously, I am sure America will be happy to cooperate with us,” Tusk added.

While the 5% suggestion has faced resistance, some NATO members are reportedly open to a more modest increase, potentially to 3% of GDP, Reuters reported on Jan. 10.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte quipped on Jan. 13 that allies should increase spending or prepare to “take Russian language courses or move to New Zealand.” Currently, 24 out of 32 NATO countries meet the 2% GDP target, but several, including Italy, Canada, and Spain, fall short.

Zelensky praised his discussions with Tusk, highlighting their focus on bolstering Ukraine’s defense capabilities and advancing sanctions against Russia.

“We discussed our defense, including the supply of weapons, weapons production, and related investments. We also focused on strengthening sanctions against Russia and bringing peace closer for Ukraine and all of Europe,” Zelensky said on X.

Polish PM accuses Russia of planning ‘air terror,’ condemns sabotage efforts

“These acts of sabotage are versions of the war that Russia has declared to the whole world, not just Ukraine,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said.

The Kyiv IndependentTim Zadorozhnyy

The appointment of a judge who visited Russia and occupied Crimea during Moscow’s war against Ukraine has sparked criticism from the head of the country’s main judicial watchdog.

The High Council of Justice, Ukraine’s top judicial governing body, appointed Oleksandra Shulika as a judge of Kirovohrad Oblast’s Onufriivka District Court on Jan. 14.

The decision highlights the continued presence of officials with ties to Russia in the Ukrainian government. While some officials with Russian passports and other links to Russia have been fired, others remain in their positions.

Ukraine has a constitutional ban on judges and other officials with foreign passports.

Shulika went to Crimea in 2014 after its illegal annexation by Russia and visited Russia several times from 2015 to 2019.

“This is absolutely unacceptable,” Mykhailo Zhernakov, executive director of the judicial watchdog the Dejure Foundation, wrote in a post on Facebook.

“Not only do they help representatives of the judicial mafia remain in their positions but also allow sympathizers of Russia to take vacant positions in the judicial system,” he said.

Ukraine’s judiciary is still notoriously corrupt despite repeated attempts to reform it, according to watchdogs. Some Ukrainian judges have routinely obstructed justice and blocked reforms.

“How do you like this ‘reformed’ body? And what do you think — will they let us into the EU with this kind of system?"

The High Council of Justice did not respond to a request for comment.

Zhernakov said the appointment of judges who visited Russia and the occupied territories during the war violates the High Council of Justice’s own guidelines.

This is not the first scandal around a judge with ties to Russia.

Bohdan Lvov, a former deputy chairman of the Supreme Court, received Russian citizenship in 1999 and still had a valid Russian passport, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s Schemes investigation project reported in 2022.

Schemes cited official information from Russia’s Federal Tax Service and leaked documents from Russia’s official passport database.

The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) later confirmed that Lvov had Russian citizenship.

Vsevolod Knyazev, then head of the Supreme Court, fired Lvov in October 2022 due to a constitutional ban on judges having foreign citizenship.

The Kyiv District Administrative Court issued a ruling in January 2024 to reinstate Lvov as a Supreme Court judge. The court claimed that there was not enough proof of Lvov’s Russian citizenship.

In June 2024, an appellate court reversed the ruling and rejected Lvov’s lawsuit for reinstatement.

How Ukrainian officials get away with having Russian citizenship – even amid war

As Russia is waging its war against Ukraine, some high-ranking Ukrainian officials with confirmed or suspected Russian citizenship are doing fine. Ukraine’s Constitution bans foreign citizenship for officials. However, in some cases, officials with Russian citizenship are not fired at all, and in…

The Kyiv IndependentOleg Sukhov

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk on Jan. 15 accused Russia of planning terrorist attacks against international airlines, including in Poland.

“Russia has been planning air terror — not only against Poland but also against airlines around the world,” he said during a joint press conference with President Volodymyr Zelensky in Warsaw.

Tusk’s remarks come after a Jan. 14 New York Times report claiming the outgoing U.S. administration warned Russian President Vladimir Putin to halt intelligence operations involving planting incendiary devices on U.S.-bound cargo planes.

“These acts of sabotage are versions of the war that Russia has declared to the whole world, not just Ukraine. They require joint action, and Poland plays a key role in countering such threats,” Tusk said.

U.S. intelligence reportedly intercepted communications in August 2024 among Russian secret service officers discussing plots to smuggle incendiary devices onto cargo planes.

Moscow has been suspected of being behind incidents in July 2024, where several parcels sent by individuals caught fire in warehouses in Germany and the U.K. Had these fires occurred mid-flight, they could have resulted in catastrophic crashes.

U.S. media reported these operations were intended as preparations for similar plots targeting the U.S. and Canada, which reportedly raised alarm among White House officials.

Zelensky traveled to Poland to meet Tusk after reaching a “breakthrough” agreement over World War II exhumations, a long-standing source of tension between the nations.

The leaders emphasized shared efforts to counter Russian aggression and address regional security challenges.

Zelensky and Tusk last met in December 2024 in Lviv to discuss historical reconciliation, including issues surrounding the Volyn massacre.

Lithuania would consider troop deployment to Ukraine upon Kyiv’s request, FM Budrys says

“We’d talk with our allies and partners about what it looks like, and we’d talk with Ukraine about what it looks like,” Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys said.

The Kyiv IndependentTim Zadorozhnyy

Ukraine managed to bring back 25 Ukrainians from Russian captivity including Azovstal defenders, President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on Jan. 15.

“Returning our people home is something that Ukraine is constantly working on. And we will not stop until we bring all of our people back,” Zelensky said in a post on Telegram.

The returning Ukrainian POWs were captured during the defense of Mariupol and its Azovstal steel plant, as well as during the defense of other key areas of the front line in Kharkiv, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts, Zelensky added.

He said some of those brought back have serious injuries and illnesses.

The exchange was conducted on a 25 for 25 basis.

In a recent agreement, Russia and Ukraine agreed to prioritize wounded POWs at selection of exchanges, followed by those held longest in captivity.

President Zelensky also expressed his gratitude for the United Arab Emirates for mediating between the parties.

Over the past year, Ukraine conducted 11 prisoner exchanges and secured the return of 356 more people than in 2023. Since the start of the full-scale invasion, Nearly 4,000 people have been released, including 1,358 in 2024.

‘We know who the good guy is’ — Trump’s defense nominee grilled over war in Ukraine

Pete Hegseth’s nomination in November sent shockwaves through Pentagon corridors.

The Kyiv IndependentBoldizsar Gyori

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese pledged the “strongest action possible” during a Jan. 15 press conference if reports of an Australian national captured while fighting for Ukraine being executed by Russian forces are confirmed, CNN reported.

Oscar Jenkins, a 32-year-old teacher from Melbourne, was reported captured by Russian forces in December. Ukrainian sources told 7News that Jenkins' body had been found, suggesting he was executed by his captors.

Australia’s Foreign Ministry has summoned the Russian ambassador to demand information and stress compliance with international law. Albanese said his government seeks “urgent clarification” and described the reports as “gravely concerning."

“If there has been any harm caused to Oscar Jenkins, that is absolutely reprehensible,” Albanese said, as reported by CNN. He did not specify potential actions Canberra might take.

In late December, Russian Telegram channels circulated a video showing Jenkins in military fatigues, interrogated and beaten by his captors. Jenkins is seen providing his name and background as the interrogators question his desire to live.

Jenkins introduces himself in the video as a biology teacher who came to help Ukraine and is now based near Kramatorsk, a city in Ukraine’s Donetsk Oblast, located approximately 700 kilometers (430 miles) east of Kyiv, and 20 kilometers (12 miles) west of the front line.

The Geneva Conventions require humane treatment of prisoners of war (POWs) and prohibit executions, which are classified as war crimes. Russia has repeatedly been accused of violating these laws by summarily executing Ukrainian POWs.

Moscow, however, labels foreign volunteers as “mercenaries” and denies them the protections afforded to POWs under international law.

If confirmed, Jenkins' execution would mark the first instance of an Australian volunteer fighter captured and executed by Russian forces since the full-scale invasion began.

At least six Australians are believed to have been killed fighting for Ukraine. The Australian government and Ukrainian authorities continue to investigate Jenkins' fate.

‘We know who the good guy is’ — Trump’s defense nominee grilled over war in Ukraine

Pete Hegseth’s nomination in November sent shockwaves through Pentagon corridors.

The Kyiv IndependentBoldizsar Gyori

Russian President Vladimir Putin frequently boasts about the strength of his country’s economy, claiming that Western sanctions only made it stronger (while in the same breath demanding that they be lifted). In fact, “stagflation” — inflation combined with minimal growth — is coming to Russia. His war on Ukraine has caused both high and rising prices and labor shortages, because many workers have been mobilized or killed, while many others have fled the country.

Heading into the Russian Central Bank’s regularly scheduled board meeting in late December, most observers expected monetary authorities to raise the policy rate from 21% to 23%. Yet the Russian Central Bank kept the rate unchanged, despite an increase in the official annual inflation figure, from 8.4% to 9.5% in the space of two months. It is easy to guess what happened. Just a day before, Putin said he had spoken with Russian Central Bank Chair Elvira Nabiullina, and it is safe to assume that he told her to leave the policy rate where it is. Any illusion about the Russian Central Bank’s independence vanished.

For the first time, Putin appears to have listened to Russia’s oligarchs rather than the professional economists overseeing monetary policy. In the last couple of months, numerous top loyalists and businessmen — from Sergei Chemezov of Rostec (defense production) and Igor Sechin of Rosneft (oil) to Alexander Shokin of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs — have bitterly complained that high interest rates will drive many companies into bankruptcy.

These warnings are not unfounded. Since the Russian government ended mortgage subsidies last July, sales of newly built properties have plummeted by around 50%, pushing Russia’s two biggest real-estate developers, Samolet and PIK, to the brink of insolvency.

Meanwhile, Russia’s official inflation figure becomes less credible by the day. According to the independent research firm ROMIR, the average cost of a Russian basket of fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG), such as food and household chemicals, had risen by 22.1% year on year in September. The company has published no new inflation readings since. It is easy to guess why.

To be sure, the FMCG price index does not reflect overall consumer inflation, since it does not track the prices of durable goods and services, which have risen less sharply compared to food prices. Yet there can be little doubt that the official Russian price index figure is too low. We might not know whether inflation is 12% or 22%, but we can be quite confident that it is higher than 9.5%. Even at Putin’s own highly choreographed annual press conference last month, inflation was the dominant concern.

Russia’s inflation is not overtly caused by fiscal profligacy. On the contrary, the Kremlin has long maintained budget surpluses (though it did register a small budget deficit of around 2% of GDP in 2022 and 2023, and it is likely to do so again in 2024). The Russia expert and former banker Craig Kennedy, however, has recently uncovered evidence that since mid-2022, the Kremlin has been strong-arming Russian banks to lend to war-related businesses on preferential terms. This off-budget financing scheme has contributed to a $415 billion surge in corporate borrowing, boosting inflation and rendering Russia’s finances highly vulnerable.

For a normal country, a budget deficit of 2% of GDP would be of no concern. But Russia is not a normal country. It has been the subject of Western financial sanctions since July 2014, and these have been quite effective at blocking access to international financing. Russia’s total private and public foreign debt has fallen from $729 billion at the end of 2013 to $293 billion at the end of September 2024. Yet nobody — including Chinese state banks — dares to lend it money.

Starved of financing, Russia has raised taxes substantially this year. Abandoning the 13% flat income tax established in 2000, it has introduced a progressive income tax system with rates starting at 15% and rising to 22% for top earners. Meanwhile, the tax rate on corporate profits has increased from 20% to 25%. But since these changes will generate only around 1.4% of GDP more in state revenues, the rest of the deficit must be financed with domestic bonds whose interest rates have already skyrocketed, doubling the cost of debt service as a share of total expenditure since 2019.

Russia thus remains dependent on a single source of financing: the National Wealth Fund, whose liquid reserves have fallen from $117 billion in 2021 to $31 billion at the end of November. That is only enough to finance three-quarters of the budget deficit in 2025.

Western financial sanctions have also weighed on the ruble, which has sunk from 34 to the dollar in 2013 to 103 today. This, too, aggravates inflation, because the central bank no longer has the reserves to defend the exchange rate (by spending dollars to buy rubles).

Though Russia has stopped publishing most of its foreign-trade statistics, the Bank of Finland Institute for Emerging Economics (whose scientific council I chair) estimates that its total exports plummeted by 28% (to $425 billion) from 2022 to 2023. Most likely, they remained at the same level in 2024, because Western energy sanctions had not been significantly tightened, although the outgoing Biden administration did so on January 10.

At the same time, tighter Western technology sanctions have had devastating effects on Russian manufacturing. Of the 108 airliners Russia planned to build since 2022, only seven have been completed. Dire conditions in the civilian sector presumably extend to the armaments sector, which is largely monopolized by Chemezov’s corrupt Rostec.

Strained by these factors, the Russian economy is approaching its moment of truth. Inflation will continue to rise in 2025, and people will get even angrier over higher food prices. Major bankruptcies are looming, and the Russian state cannot afford large bailouts. Business leaders are fiercely objecting to high interest rates, and the shortage of labor — and soldiers — is reaching a crisis stage.

The most critical shortage, however, is budget financing, as Russia’s last liquid reserves are likely to run out in the fall of 2025. Budget cuts will then become necessary. In the meantime, the war economy might also require price controls and rationing — the old Soviet sins. As the risk of a financial crash rises, Russia’s imperiled economy is about to pose serious constraints on Putin’s war.

Editor’s Note: Copyright, Project Syndicate. This article was published by Project Syndicate on Jan. 15, 2025, and has been republished by the Kyiv Independent with permission. The opinions expressed in the op-ed section are those of the authors and do not purport to reflect the views of the Kyiv Independent.

The question isn’t if China will turn on Russia, but when

Like Czar Nicholas II, Russian President Vladimir Putin has misidentified his primary foe. Fighting a war of choice, he allows the real menace to his country to gather strength. China, not Ukraine, constitutes Russia’s existential threat. In the Russo-Japanese War (1904-05), Nicholas fought Japan ov…

The Kyiv IndependentSarah C. Paine

Vilnius would consider deploying troops to Ukraine with its allies in the future if Kyiv were to make such a request, Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys told LRT TV on Jan. 14.

The proposal for an international peacekeeping force has gained traction recently, as European nations prepare to take a more prominent role in Ukraine’s defense when U.S. President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20.

Budrys said that Lithuania did not rule out such possibilities which were touted at a summit in Paris last year when French President Emmanuel Macron invited Lithuania’s president and others to explore expanded military involvement in Ukraine.

“Lithuania is a security provider in the region, not just a recipient,” Budrys said. “If the question arises, I have no doubt that the Lithuanian flag will be there."

“We’d talk with our allies and partners about what it looks like, and we’d talk with Ukraine about what it looks like,” he added.

Macron has championed the idea of deploying European troops in Ukraine since early 2024.

President Volodymyr Zelensky and Macron discussed the possibility during a meeting on Dec. 18, and Macron raised the proposal again during a trilateral meeting with Trump on Dec. 7. Trump reportedly expressed interest in European-led ceasefire monitoring.

On Jan. 13, Zelensky and Macron held a phone call to discuss Ukraine’s air defense priorities and the possible deployment of peacekeepers. Both leaders agreed to meet soon to advance plans for securing guarantees for Ukraine.

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer is also expected to visit Ukraine in the coming weeks to discuss the peacekeeping initiative, Bloomberg reported on Jan. 10.

Biden team seeks European support to leverage frozen Russian assets in talks with Moscow, CNN reports

The strategy reportedly aims to pressure Moscow by signaling the funds could only be reclaimed through negotiations with Ukraine.

The Kyiv IndependentTim Zadorozhnyy

Russian attacks against Ukraine wounded 16 and killed one person over the past day, regional authorities, and the Office of the Prosecutor General reported on Jan. 15.

Eight people, including two children were injured in Donetsk Oblast, the Office of the Prosecutor General reported on its Telegram channel, when the Russian military struck a multi-storey building in Kramatorsk.

On the night of January 14-15 the Russian military attacked Ukraine with one Iskander-M/KN ballistic missile, seven Kh-22/32, 27 Kh-101/Kh-55 and four Kalibr cruise missiles, as well as four Kh-59/Kh-69 guided missiles.

During the overnight attack, Russia also launched 74 Shahed-type and various other types of dummy drones, Ukraine’s Air Force reported on their Telegram channel.

Air defenses shot down 23 Kh-101/Kh-55 and three Kalibr cruise missiles, along with Kh-59/Kh-69 guided missiles. They also downed 47 drones, while 27 other drones were lost in the airspace, the Air Force said.

The missiles hit critical infrastructure in Lviv and Ivano-Frankivsk Oblasts, with no reports of casualties.

A 52-year-old man died, and a 74-year-old woman was injured during Russian attacks on Kharkiv Oblast, Governor Oleh Syniehubov reported on his Telegram channel.

Seven were injured as a result of Russian attacks on the city of Kherson and 36 other settlements, Kherson Oblast Governor Oleksandr Prokudin reported on his Telegram channel.

Russia launches mass missile attack against Ukraine

Explosions were reported in Kharkiv, Khmelnytsky Oblast, and Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast.

The Kyiv IndependentAbbey Fenbert

Russia will resume gas supplies to Transnistria in the form of humanitarian aid, the head of the Moscow-controlled breakaway region said on Jan. 15, but those to the rest of Moldova will remain cut off.

Vadim Krasnoselsky made the announcement in a statement after returning from a trip to Moscow, where he attended talks at Russia’s Ministry of Energy.

Russia’s state-controlled energy giant Gazprom halted gas supplies to Moldova on Jan. 1, citing alleged unpaid debts by Moldovagaz.

The gas suspension has led to widespread power outages in Transnistria, pushing the region toward industrial collapse.

“Gas supplies for the needs of Transnistrians and the functioning of the economy of Transnistria will be restored in the format of providing humanitarian and technical assistance to the republic,” Krasnoselsky said.

He did not provide technical details nor a timeline for the restoration of gas flows.

Transnistrian authorities previously rejected an offer from Chisinau to help purchase gas via European platforms.

While Moldova has transitioned to European energy supplies, Transnistria remains heavily reliant on Russian gas. Russian troops have been stationed in the region since the early 1990s.

Gazprom’s suspension coincided with the expiration of a deal allowing Russian gas to transit through Ukraine. However, Gazprom attributed the cutoff to Moldova’s purported debt rather than transit issues.

Moldovan officials dispute these claims, pointing to an international audit that failed to verify the alleged debt.

Will Transnistria’s gas crisis lead to its collapse and reintegration into Moldova?

By halting natural gas supplies to Moldova on Jan. 1, Russia created an unprecedented economic crisis in the Russian-occupied part of the country — Transnistria. The crisis prompted a question: will the breakaway region, occupied by Russia since 1992, survive without Russian gas? Free-of-charge Ru…

The Kyiv IndependentOleg Sukhov

As the Biden administration prepares to leave office, it is reportedly urging European partners to support the transfer of frozen Russian central bank assets worth $300 billion to a special account as leverage in negotiations with Moscow, CNN reported on Jan. 15, citing anonymous administration officials.

The strategy reportedly aims to pressure Moscow by signaling the funds could only be reclaimed through negotiations with Ukraine.

“If you want to get this money, you will have to negotiate,” a source told CNN.

The proposal involves moving the frozen assets, currently held primarily in European banks, to a deposit account from which withdrawals would only be allowed as part of a future peace deal with Ukraine.

Biden officials are reportedly discussing the plan with President-elect Donald Trump’s team, including Secretary of State nominee Marco Rubio, and incoming National Security Adviser Mike Waltz. Both reportedly back the initiative, aligning with Trump’s goal to expedite a resolution to the war.

European governments have reportedly expressed hesitancy about the plan, citing concerns over its compliance with international law. Confiscation of frozen Russian funds has been a contentious issue, and even using the assets' annual income — around $3.2 billion — required significant negotiation.

The European Union recently disbursed €3 billion ($3.09 billion) to Ukraine as part of a $50 billion G7 loan initiative. The EU’s €20 billion ($20.6 billion) contribution to the program is partially funded by income from frozen Russian assets.

The U.S. has also contributed $20 billion toward the loan assistance, showcasing a concerted Western effort to support Ukraine financially while leveraging Russian assets.

Outgoing President Joe Biden expressed confidence on Jan. 10 in his administration’s support for Ukraine, saying he did “all I could to help” while voicing hope for continued U.S. backing under Trump.

As the U.S. transitions to a new administration, the international community’s stance on utilizing these assets may significantly influence diplomatic efforts to end Russia’s war against Ukraine.

‘We know who the good guy is’ — Trump’s defense nominee grilled over war in Ukraine

Pete Hegseth’s nomination in November sent shockwaves through Pentagon corridors.

The Kyiv IndependentBoldizsar Gyori

There is no clear consensus among Ukrainians about what a potential peace agreement with Russia should look like, a new global poll published on Jan. 15 has found.

The poll, conducted by the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), presented respondents with four options relating to NATO/EU membership, security guarantees, and ceding/regaining occupied territories.

Not one gained a majority for or against from respondents.

“Such disagreements could stoke political turmoil if and when negotiations begin,” the report reads.

Though peace negotiations are a long way off, the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump on Jan. 20 has accelerated discussion of their possibility in Kyiv, Moscow, and capitals around the world.

Trump vowed to bring Kyiv and Moscow to the negotiating table and swiftly end the full-scale war that nears its third anniversary.

Earlier this week, he told reporters that arrangements for a meeting with Putin are underway.

The wide-ranging, global poll surveyed respondents in 16 European countries including the U.K., Russia, and Ukraine, and eight non-European countries including Brazil, China, India, Saudi Arabia, and the U.S. about attitudes towards the U.S. and international powers ahead of Trump’s inauguration.

Many of the questions related to Trump’s possible influence on global events such as the wars in Ukraine, and the Middle East, as well as the future balance of global power.

In Ukraine, expectations of an outright victory in the war against Russia have fallen sharply in just the last six months since the poll was last conducted, from 58% in May 2024, to 34% in November 2024.

Of the options available, most Ukrainians — 47% — now say a compromise settlement with Russia is the most likely outcome of the war.

Ukrainians are split on whether or not the incoming Trump administration will make peace more or less likely — 39% say it will be more likely, 35% less likely, and 26% say it will make no difference.

The question is still largely hypothetical — despite multiple promises during the U.S. presidential election campaign to negotiate an end to the war as soon as he was elected, Donald Trump is yet to lay out any concrete plans of how he intends to do so.

Tempering expectations further, Trump’s choice for special Ukraine peace envoy, Keith Kellogg, earlier this month said Trump wants to end the war in 100 days.

Then there is the issue of what Trump will demand from both sides. While much of the election rhetoric from Trump and his allies suggested Kyiv could be forced to pay a heavy price and cede territory, Kellogg has also sought to play this down.

“People need to understand, he’s not trying to give something to Putin or to the Russians, he’s actually trying to save Ukraine and save their sovereignty,” Kellogg said.

“And he’s going to make sure that it’s equitable and it’s fair."

As for the global implications of a second Trump presidency, and how he deals with issues such as the war in Ukraine, the poll found a wide range of views across the countries polled.

In India, China, and Brazil, majorities or pluralities believe Trump will be a “good thing” for prospects of peace around the world, as well as for their own countries.

But in countries more allied with the U.S. there was skepticism — only 24% of those in the UK, 31% in South Korea, and 34% in the EU countries polled said Trump’s presidency would make peace in Ukraine more likely, while even fewer thought the same about the Middle East.

The authors of the report suggested that while there is obviously a nervousness in Europe about Trump, there is also an opportunity for Europe to reassert itself on the global stage.

“Europe may stand almost alone in a Trumpian world, but this doesn’t mean we Europeans are powerless to act,” historian Timothy Garton Ash said, adding: “There are opportunities in this new, transactional space for alliances and influence.

“Indeed, the very fact that the EU is held in such high regard by people in so many countries and is even expected to grow in strength in the coming decade, should give leaders hope that there is room for a strong and independent-minded Europe in the world."

The poll was conducted in November 2024 in 16 European countries (Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Spain, Switzerland, Türkiye, Ukraine and the United Kingdom), and eight non-European countries (Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea and the United States).

The total number of respondents was 28,549.

‘We know who the good guy is’ — Trump’s defense nominee grilled over war in Ukraine

Pete Hegseth’s nomination in November sent shockwaves through Pentagon corridors.

The Kyiv IndependentBoldizsar Gyori

President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for defense secretary was grilled over the war in Ukraine during a confirmation hearing on Jan. 14, after he failed to mention Russia’s full-scale invasion during his opening remarks.

Speaking to the Armed Services Committee, Pete Hegseth was asked if the omission was “code for ‘we’re going to abandon Ukraine.'"

“We know who the aggressor is,” Hegseth replied, adding: “We know who the good guy is. We’d like to see (the resolution of the war be) as advantageous for the Ukrainians as possible."

“But that war needs to come to an end,” he added.

The Armed Services Committee is expected to vote on Hegseth’s confirmation as soon as Monday, Reuters reports. He will then be considered by the full U.S. Senate.

Hegseth’s nomination in November sent shockwaves through Pentagon corridors, with officials anonymously questioning his qualifications to lead the department.

He would lead 1.3 million troops and over 750,000 civilians, preside over a $850 billion budget, and hold meetings with U.S. allies, acting as the principal defense policymaker and adviser.

A former conservative talk show host on Fox News, Hegseth is seen as an isolationist who has called for reducing the U.S. commitment to the NATO military alliance.

He previously served as an infantry captain in the Army National Guard, doing multiple tours of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Following his discharge from the army, he became head of the conservative organization Concerned Veterans for America and, in June 2024, released a book titled “The War on Warriors: Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free."

Hegseth also unsuccessfully ran as a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Minnesota in 2012.

Ukraine targets Russia’s industrial plants, ammunition depots in ‘massive’ strike overnight

Chemical plants, refineries, the Engels airbase, and other facilities in Russia were successfully targeted, a source in the Security Service of Ukraine told the Kyiv Independent.

The Kyiv IndependentTim Zadorozhnyy