Who Is Winning in Ukraine?
Discussions are raging everywhere about who is winning and therefore who is losing in the events unfolding in Ukraine. In reality, these are developments that had been taking shape for some time, but what has surprised everyone is the truly abrupt and chaotic pace that Trump has imposed on them—just as he is doing in every field—leaving both friends and foes bewildered.
To judge victory or defeat, one must observe the events and assess whether the objectives set by the parties involved have been achieved or not.
The Facts
Three years ago, Putin believed that with a small, poorly armed and organized army, he would be able to overthrow the Ukrainian government, that President Zelensky would flee, and that he would be replaced by a pro-Russian government whose leader was already prepared to take office. He never intended a full conquest or even an annexation of any provinces. Despite being caught off guard, the Ukrainians fought heroically, Zelensky did not flee at all and instead galvanized his people, organized the resistance even before Western aid arrived, and, after a few months, the Russians were forced to retreat. The Russians then invaded those Ukrainian territories inhabited by Russian speakers, some of whom had already been in revolt since 2015—a meager compensation for their initial failure.
Ukraine received massive aid and, above all, political reassurances from Europe and America. The Russian offensive stalled; the war of movement ended, and a long, bloody war of attrition began. Confident in the unconditional support of the West, the Ukrainians believed they could win outright, completely defeat Russia, reclaim Crimea, and even bring about Putin’s downfall. But just like the Russian offensive, the Ukrainian offensive also bogged down in a trench war reminiscent of World War I, though on a different scale.
Over time, however, the Ukrainians lost their initial momentum. They are now exhausted, have no fresh forces to send to the front, and their population is worn out by destruction, hardship, and millions of refugees. Morale is faltering, and the Russians, slowly but surely, continue to advance. It has become clear that the war could only end with a crystallization of the situation on the ground, as always happens when neither side can achieve a decisive victory.
Suddenly, however, Trump’s dramatic and overwhelming intervention has upended the situation in Ukraine. He had promised to end the war as soon as he took office and is trying to keep that promise at any cost, showing little concern for Ukraine’s fate—which, realistically, is of little importance to the U.S.
In theory, Europeans could still supply Ukraine with weapons even without American support, but they are uncertain and, above all, divided. Apart from the expenses, which are hard to justify to their voters, prolonging the war would be futile for Ukraine, which is clearly unable to truly defeat Russia—a fact that has been evident for some time now.
So, based on the facts outlined above, let’s assess who is winning and who is losing.
Russia
Putin declares himself the winner, and to some extent, both friends and foes agree. However, if his goal was to bring Ukraine back into Russia’s sphere of influence, he has failed. Above all, after such a disastrous and bloody war, it is highly unlikely that Ukraine will ever have good relations with Russia again. Even if hostilities end, the deep divide of bloodshed and hatred between Ukrainians and Russians will prevent any meaningful cooperation for an indefinite—but certainly long—time. This rift dates back even before the 2015 events, the Donbass uprising, and the 2005 Orange Revolution.
He has gained a strip of territory—completely devastated, at that—that connects Russia to Crimea, but this is of little significance. His economy has withstood sanctions far better than the West anticipated, though it has certainly suffered. A possible outcome is that other former Soviet states may be discouraged from joining alliances perceived as hostile (Georgia, for example). However, the broader plan—if there ever was one—of reconstituting the Soviet Union or the Russian Empire seems to have faded for the foreseeable future.
Ukraine
Ukraine appears to be the losing side. However, upon closer inspection, it has preserved its independence. It may not be able to join NATO or the EU, but it can still maintain privileged relations with the West. It has lost part of its territory, true, but these were Russian-speaking provinces that had long been restless and resistant to Ukrainian nationalism, especially after 2015.
What seems most defeated is Zelensky’s government itself. A few months after the war began, it could have ended under roughly the same conditions as today. The Russian-speaking territories could have been ceded to Russia, perhaps through a referendum (as was suggested in an appeal by Italian historians). Thus, all the sacrifices, human losses, and material destruction of nearly three years of war will appear pointless.
European Union
European nations also seem like major losers, even marginalized in the peace negotiations, losing both prestige and authority.
Yet, Europeans viewed this war as their own, spreading the idea that Ukraine was fighting for Europe as well—for democracy against Putin’s despotism.
But in reality, this almost unanimous narrative has no real foundation. It is hardly conceivable that Russia, which failed even to subdue Ukraine, could ever invade Western countries—nor would it have any reason to attempt such an operation.
Even if Russia were to rebuild a state within the borders of the former Soviet Union, it is unclear why this would pose a threat to Europeans. After all, the breakup of the Soviet Union into 15 states after the fall of communism was entirely unexpected and accidental, without solid motivations. In each of these states, there remain significant national minorities (on average, about one-third of the population), which always pose difficult stability issues. In the end, the war in Ukraine itself originated from a conflict with the Russian minority (the Donbass uprising).
What has truly harmed Europe, however, is the severing of trade relations with Russia, which had been a supplier of cheap gas. Germany, often called the "engine of Europe," has suffered greatly. Of course, the crisis currently spreading across Europe is not solely due to this factor, but it is certainly not insignificant.
Even the idea that this is a conflict between democracy and dictatorship lacks foundation. It is true that Putin can be considered a dictator and Zelensky a democratically elected president, but Putin does not aspire—even remotely—to establish dictatorships in the West. Quite the opposite: it is more likely that Western powers are pushing for democracy in Russia.
This is no longer the Cold War era, when the Soviet Union represented an expansionist regime seeking to spread its ideology worldwide.
There has also been talk of violations of international law with the invasion of a sovereign state. However, violations and invasions have been numerous, often carried out by Western democracies themselves—consider the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the former Yugoslavia. Justifications always exist and depend on perspectives.
In reality, Europe has nothing to fear from the events in Ukraine; on the contrary, it could benefit from the possible resumption of trade relations with Russia, particularly regarding gas supplies.
United States
The United States has provided substantial aid to Ukraine, as have European nations. However, Trump has completely broken with Biden’s administration and can now boast of having ended the war. This significantly boosts his prestige for bringing peace to Ukraine—not as a mere mediator, but as an arbiter dictating the terms—while the rest of the world watches and gets lost in futile discussions.
America has massively contributed to Ukraine’s war effort; in return, Trump is demanding Ukraine’s rare earth minerals. However, this seems more like a propaganda move to demonstrate that he is recovering the money "wasted" by his predecessors.
In reality, if Ukraine had such vast resources, it would not have been (even before the war) the poorest country in Europe. Rare earth minerals do exist in Ukraine, but exploiting and commercializing them is a different matter—it requires funding and technical expertise, which Ukraine currently lacks.
So, we could say that in Ukraine, the real winner is Trump, not America.