Ukraine took part in the NATO leaders summit on June 24–25 in The Hague. Two issues were especially important for Kyiv at this summit. The first is the prospect of joining NATO. The second is the continuation of military assistance from Alliance countries and the availability of the necessary resources. On the Ukrainian context of the 2025 NATO summit, Volodymyr Solovian, the head of the UCMC Hybrid Warfare Analysis Group, spoke on the FREEДОМ television channel.
Here’s a text version of the interview:
What should Ukraine primarily expect from the NATO summit?
The NATO summit could serve as a platform for clarifying the United States’ position on further support for Kyiv, as well as an opportunity to attempt to influence the White House on the issue of arms deliveries. However, I do not believe that the NATO summit will fundamentally change Donald Trump’s position. Rather, it’s about creating a background of determination by European countries as part of broad pressure on the US president concerning the Ukrainian issue. In the end, I believe the key role may be played not by European leaders, but by American arms manufacturers in the US.
Do you think American defense companies are ready to actively lobby for the sale of US arms to Ukraine, even if it goes against Trump’s political course?
I think such efforts are already taking place, mostly behind the scenes. In this context, I’d draw attention to the recent public conflict between Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Let me remind you that Musk spoke out against traditional arms corporations like Boeing, Northrop Group, and Lockheed Martin. He criticized the allocation of large budgets for weapons development and production that, in his opinion, do not meet the requirements of future wars. For example, Musk contrasted the F-35 fighter program with the development of unmanned systems, which matches his own business interests. So, the fact that Musk has fallen out of Trump’s closest circle could have positive consequences for traditional arms manufacturers, as they seek to expand orders for missiles and other components that are also important for Ukraine.
As for the NATO defense budget, Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg announced that the summit will present a final plan for reaching the 5% spending level, with 1.5% allocated to investments in security and national resilience. Where do you think these expenditures will go?
The funds in question will be allocated not only to the production and purchase of weapons but also to strengthen energy systems, cybersecurity, and informational work to raise public awareness. European countries need to understand that, amid a deficit of security, it is impossible to sustainably develop the economy, culture, and other social sectors. Even today, after Russian aggression, not all EU countries are ready to rethink their priorities. This is especially evident in the countries of southern Europe – in Italy, Spain, and Greece, most citizens oppose increasing defense spending. But examples of the energy blackouts that occurred in April in Spain and Portugal show that if we ignore security, then the social sphere itself can become extremely vulnerable.
Over the past decades, Europe has grown accustomed to living in the paradigm of the “end of history,” so even the so-called ultimatums issued by Putin to the West on the eve of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine were not truly grasped in European capitals. Let me stress that I’m not suggesting making concessions to Moscow – on the contrary, Europeans must mobilize and recognize that Russian aggression against Ukraine is not just a Ukrainian war, but a shared security challenge. Even those countries that currently feel relatively safe could become targets of aggression tomorrow.
Last year, European NATO countries and Canada provided more military assistance to Ukraine than the United States. However, is Europe ready to increase support and build up its own defense capacity?
The EU must develop its own military-industrial complex and reduce dependence on the US, since 80% of the weapons and military equipment in European arsenals is manufactured outside the EU. This statistic shows that a lot of time has been lost – not only during the peacefull years of disarmament, but unfortunately even after 2022. Real steps toward increasing funding for military production at the European level were only taken when it became obvious that the US was changing its approach to ensuring Europe’s security.
The absence of a coordinated Europe-wide policy in the defense industry and the competition between Europe’s key producers -France, Germany, and the United Kingdom – are factors that slow the pace and scale of arms production. In terms of direct aid to Ukraine, Europeans tend to “throw money at the problem.” But in the long run, to deter Russia, a comprehensive approach is needed – joint production platforms and a unified policy for the development of the European defense industry.
Behind the scenes, discussions may take place on how to strengthen support for Ukraine. But what is lacking for Ukraine to become a full-fledged member of the Alliance?
Regarding the question of Ukraine’s NATO membership – at present, there is no consensus among European countries. Even though Ukraine is equipped with NATO-standard equipment and operates alongside allies, the main obstacle is that the war with Russia is not yet over. Accordingly, many NATO countries view Ukraine’s accession as a risk of direct confrontation with Russia. Meanwhile, European countries view their NATO membership through the prism of national security – and a key element of that security, in their view, is not being pulled into a conflict with a nuclear-armed state.
Therefore, under the current circumstances, Ukraine’s key task is to modernize its army and develop its defense industry so that when the historical moment comes – when Russia is no longer able to hold on to the occupied territories – we will be ready to join the Alliance. I’m convinced that this opportunity will come, because Russian history has always followed the “pendulum principle.” Given the economic problems that Russia will face in the near future, this is a very realistic .
