Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Wednesday that it was “painful when President [Donald] Trump chooses one side, not our side.” His remark came after a diesel deal between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin added another strain to relations between Washington, Kyiv and Ukraine’s European backers.
The tension grew after reported disruptions to Starlink and Starshield services on October 13 and 14, which caught Ukraine’s military off guard. Service was later restored. Reports that the restrictions were imposed at the White House’s request to pressure Kyiv have not been confirmed. On Friday, Zelenskyy accused Washington of continuing to throttle Starlink while offering Russia new concessions.
Diesel deal and Starlink disruption widen the rift
A commentary on the dispute argues that the two episodes have reinforced a growing sense of division between Ukraine and the United States. It notes, however, that it is too early to judge where things are heading. Trump has leaned towards Moscow before, most notably at his August 2025 summit with Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, and later returned to conditional support for Ukraine. That shift came amid Russian intransigence and diplomatic efforts by Kyiv and European leaders.
The same commentary points to several areas of continuing cooperation. Under an arrangement, Europe pays for US weapons delivered to Ukraine, and the commentary describes this as working. The United States also continues to share intelligence with Kyiv, although reports say some critical information has been withheld. According to the piece, the White House has walked back proposals to recognise Crimea as de jure Russian, which had been floated in its April 2025 peace framework, and has dropped a demand that Kyiv withdraw from the entirety of its Donbas region.
Ukraine and Europe have kept backing Trump’s diplomatic outreach to Moscow, which is led by his envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. The diesel deal itself may still unravel because of bipartisan opposition in Congress, including from Republican senators. For that reason, the commentary suggests Washington’s latest move towards Moscow may prove less significant than it now appears.
Russian pressure on the front and across Europe
The commentary warns that Ukraine and its European partners have reasons for concern beyond Trump’s unpredictability. Chief among them, it says, is Putin’s determination to step up the war. Ukrainian cities and critical infrastructure are reportedly under daily attack from ballistic missiles and upgraded jet-propelled drones, while Ukraine’s air defences are struggling. The country is preparing for another difficult winter.
Russia did not accept Trump’s proposal for a partial ceasefire on strikes against energy facilities, which Ukraine did accept. Moscow is now portraying Kyiv as the party undermining peace after Ukrainian attacks resumed. These included an attack on a refinery in the city of Ryazan on Thursday, which Trump described as “a disgrace.”
The fighting has also spilled onto NATO’s eastern flank. Ships carrying Ukrainian grain through the Black Sea were attacked in Romanian waters. The commentary says Russia is expanding hybrid attacks in Europe to disrupt weapons and ammunition supplies to Ukraine and to shape public opinion in key countries such as Germany by spreading fear. Some voices in the European Union are pushing to re-engage with Moscow. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico confirmed that the Slovak-Russian intergovernmental economic commission would resume work. Bulgarian Prime Minister Rumen Radev praised Trump’s diesel diplomacy, even as Russian drones struck near Bulgaria’s Black Sea coast.
EU funding for Ukraine faces a looming shortfall
Paying for Ukraine is another challenge for Europe. The commentary says the 90-billion-euro ($101bn) loan the EU authorised in April might be used up well before the end of 2027. Some estimates suggest Kyiv would need an extra 70 billion euros ($79bn) for defence and civilian purposes in 2027.
The issue arrives as EU member states negotiate the bloc’s 2028-2034 budget. Some governments are calling for deep spending cuts. The contested question of whether aid for Ukraine should come from Russian financial assets frozen in Europe has returned, and Trump is calling for some of that money to be released.
The disputes come ahead of several major elections, including the French presidential election in April and May, as well as polls in Spain, Italy and Poland. Even so, diplomatic and financial support for Ukraine has remained fairly steady. European Council President Antonio Costa said on Friday, while appearing alongside Zelenskyy and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Brussels, “This is no time to withdraw the support to Ukraine. This is no time to relieve Russia’s sanctions.” Zelenskyy warned that “If we fall, 20 million Ukrainians will come to Europe.”
Before the summit, the EU opened two clusters in accession talks with Ukraine and imposed a new round of sanctions on Russia. Zelenskyy had earlier held talks in London on Wednesday with British Prime Minister Andy Burnham and King Charles III before travelling to Brussels.
Limits on Europe’s ability to replace the United States
The commentary argues that the EU and the United Kingdom are already doing much of what they can. They have, in its view, taken over from the US as the main international champions of Ukraine and are de facto guarantors of its survival as a state. Membership of the EU, or at least a closely integrated partnership such as Norway’s, is described as the best long-term outcome for Kyiv.
In the short term, however, Europe lacks the political weight and military capability to replace the US. European intelligence agencies can probably provide Ukraine with some data, but there is no EU alternative to Starlink. The commentary says Europe cannot supply enough air-defence systems and interceptors to counter Russian attacks without US support. Europe is investing in these capabilities to gain strategic autonomy, but even in the best case those efforts would take a decade to bear fruit.
The piece also says Europeans have little leverage to bring Putin to the negotiating table. Positive incentives such as sanctions relief and the restoration of oil and gas flows could help, but any Russian response would likely require some form of pressure. The commentary says the US has so far failed to press Putin and, under Trump, has moved from pressure to offers, promoting deals that mix diplomacy and business. It attributes part of this failure to fear of escalation with another nuclear power, and part to what it calls the current administration’s opportunism.
Given this, the commentary expects Zelenskyy and European leaders to keep trying to win Trump’s support and smooth over differences. They are reportedly hoping the White House’s outreach to Russia will fade after the midterm elections. They also plan to argue that standing firm against Moscow is the best way for Trump to secure his legacy, a view the piece says is shared by his fellow Republicans. In the commentary’s words, the strategy is to wait it out: first the winter, then the Trump presidency.
