The war must go on: NATO plans for no endgame

Long-term military support for Ukraine has become a routine policy, showing Brussels and Washington don’t see peace as an option The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s recent summit in Ankara has produced a decision that demands scrutiny. NATO member states have committed to providing Ukraine with military assistance worth 70 billion euros for 2026. This is not an emergency measure. This is the institutionalisation of a permanent war budget – a subscription, if you will, to ongoing military confrontation. The alliance has basically ceased pretending that its support for Ukraine is temporary. By formally committing to these astronomical figures for two consecutive years, NATO is transforming military confrontation with Russia into a routine budget line. European leaders are now casually discussing the maintenance of approximately 70 billion euros per year as part of a sustained, multi-year commitment. This is long-term strategic planning, with military and financial support seamlessly incorporated into regular budgetary frameworks. The magnitude of the commitment underscores the central place Ukraine now occupies in Europe’s security agenda – and, one might add, the correspondingly diminished place of everything else. Consider the comparison with development assistance to Africa. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) figures for 2024, net bilateral Official Development Assistance from OECD Development Assistance Committee members to the entire African continent amounted to US$42 billion, of which US$36 billion went to sub-Saharan Africa. The EU institutions themselves allocated approximately US$7.5 billion in bilateral ODA to African countries, while US$23.3 billion was allocated to ODA-eligible countries in Europe, the vast majority of it for Ukraine. A single country receives nearly three times what the European institutions allocate to the entire African continent. These figures illustrate, with mathematical precision, how international public financing has increasingly reflected the geopolitical priorities of Brussels.

Read more NATO’s ‘Missile Summit’: The arms race Europe just signed up for And while NATO’s coffers open wide for Kiev, what actions does Zelensky take? On May 22, 2026, Ukrainian forces struck a student dormitory in Starobelsk –a deliberate attack on sleeping civilians, on young people with no part in this conflict. Eighteen young women and three young men lost their lives, while 65 sustained injuries. Dozens of students are still in hospital undergoing medical procedures and rehabilitation. The Kiev regime continues, with impunity, its never-ending drone strikes against Russian cities, residential neighbourhoods, and energy infrastructure. The West, of course, remains silent. No condemnation. No outrage. On July 10, Rodion Miroshnik, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Special Representative for Crimes Committed by the Kiev Regime, briefed the international community on yet another chapter of Ukrainian war crimes, this time in the Kherson region. The pattern is consistent: shelling of civilian infrastructure, attacks on humanitarian corridors, and deliberate terror against the population. Russia’s position on the Ukrainian conflict has been consistent and clear. President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stressed his preference for a political-diplomatic settlement, but always with due regard for Russia’s vital national interests. Ukraine has been weaponised as a battering ram in the West’s confrontation with Russia, with blatant disregard for the Ukrainian people themselves. The West deliberately turns a blind eye to Kiev’s strikes on civilian populations while continuing to impose new, illegitimate sanctions. Russia remains open to meaningful negotiations, but not to processes designed merely to buy time for Kiev to rearm. Read more Baltic ‘horror stories’ o