Last week, US President Donald Trump shocked European capitals by presenting Kyiv with an extraordinary ultimatum: accept Washington's surprise draft plan to end the war in Ukraine or risk losing American weapons and intelligence.
Since then, the plan has been adjusted to incorporate Ukrainian and European suggestions to make it less pro-Russian, but the threat still hangs over Kyiv.
This raises two questions: can Europe seamlessly step in and replace US-supplied weapons, and can Ukraine continue military operations without American weapons? Politico, in its material, answers both questions - "no and yes," reports UNN.
To provide a more detailed answer, Politico examined five key questions raised by Trump's ultimatum and their implications for Ukraine's war effort.
1. Can Europe simply replace the United States?
No, not anytime soon, and not at the level Ukraine needs.
Christian Melling, a senior advisor at the European Policy Centre, stated that Europe could support Ukraine without the US, but only with great risk. Any cessation of Washington's supplies would have to be "compensated by losses or a change in Ukraine's methods of warfare." And even then, achieving the current level of support is unlikely.
Europe supplies Ukraine with ammunition, tanks, fighter jets, and much more, but American weapons remain vital.
The publication emphasizes that the most serious gap is air and missile defense. Ukraine's ability to block Russian ballistic missiles is largely based on American Patriot systems and their PAC-3 missiles, which are produced only by the United States.
"I would gladly say that we could do without the United States... but only for a while," said Mykola Bielieskov, a research fellow at Ukraine's National Institute for Strategic Studies. "Only the United States can produce PAC-3 MSE interceptor missiles."
This month, the US State Department approved the sale of Patriot anti-missile systems to Ukraine worth $105 million.
Europe does supply Ukraine with the Franco-Italian SAMP/T air defense system, which is similar in capability to the Patriot, and will receive an upgraded SAMP/NG system next year. However, given that the Kremlin launches devastating attacks on Ukrainian cities almost daily, Ukraine needs every system it can get.
2. How important is intelligence sharing?
Melling noted that Ukraine's early warning system for incoming missiles relies on dense networks of American satellites and sensors that Europe simply does not have. European resources could help "with gaps," but "they will never be as effective."
In March, Trump briefly suspended intelligence sharing with Ukraine in an attempt to force Kyiv to the negotiating table.
Ukraine has access to intelligence satellites through the Finnish space company ICEYE, and Europe has its own intelligence capabilities, just not at the same level as the US.
Without US assistance, it would be more difficult to detect Russian attacks and prepare counterattacks, such as striking Russian air defense batteries and oil refineries, Politico adds.
"Without US assistance, our capabilities to launch long-range strikes against Russia will be critically limited. It will be very difficult for us. But I can proudly say that we have all come a long way and will not lose this capability," said a Ukrainian serviceman from Ukraine's Unmanned Systems Forces, known only by the call sign Lynch, at a conference in Kyiv on Friday.
If the US stops sharing intelligence, it "will effectively lead to more Ukrainian casualties," said Maksym Skrypchenko, president of the Kyiv-based Transatlantic Dialogue Center.
Eventually, Europe could produce more satellites and reconnaissance aircraft. But it would take years just to reach European countries' target capabilities, let alone help Ukraine.
3. Isn't Europe already ahead of the US in terms of spending?
Europe is currently clearly ahead of the US in terms of spending on Ukraine, but that doesn't mean it's in control, Politico emphasizes.
Data from the Kiel Institute shows that from 2022 to 2024, Washington and Europe allocated roughly the same amount of military funds to Kyiv on average each month. With Trump's arrival, the situation changed dramatically: monthly US military aid fell to almost zero, while European governments increased it to almost 4 billion euros per month in the first half of the year, and even after a summer slowdown, provided several times more than the US.
Instead of supplying weapons, the US sells them and forces allies to pay the costs according to Ukraine's prioritized needs list.
PURL is a shopping list agreed with NATO, under which European governments transfer funds directly to American defense companies to purchase weapons that Ukraine cannot obtain anywhere else. This is a way to ensure the uninterrupted supply of critical American weapons to Ukraine and a political means to prevent transactional Trump from abandoning Kyiv.
"Americans are selling Ukraine what cannot be replaced," said Skrypchenko, noting that the American industry needs the European market and will want to continue selling Patriots and other unique systems.
But this does not give Europe real control. Melling noted that the deeper problem is that Washington no longer views defense agreements as reliable contracts. The United States, he said, "is increasingly behaving like a partner who is free to rewrite the terms with any change in its political mood," leaving Europeans defenseless.
4. Will the US really stop selling weapons to Ukraine?
Skrypchenko argued that commercial logic is against a complete cessation of supplies; PURL has already reserved $3.5 billion, and this is a huge amount for American defense companies that they are not willing to give up. "I don't think the US will stop selling us weapons at the European price," he said.
However, Melling warned that political power is more important than commercial incentives.
"The US government can stop exports with a single decision," he said, referring to instances where the Trump administration had previously halted supplies or intelligence sharing. Washington could also, if it wished, block or freeze re-exports or slow down supplies overnight to pressure Kyiv or Europe.
These are the sentiments prevailing in Washington.
"President Trump stopped funding this war, but the United States continues to supply or sell NATO a large amount of weapons. We cannot do this forever," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News on Monday.
5. Can Ukraine continue to fight without the United States?
Ukraine can continue to fight, but the war will immediately enter a much more vulnerable and unpredictable phase.
Russia is losing thousands of people a week in its slow offensive, and the Ukrainian military has managed to inflict enormous damage thanks to its drones and increased artillery shells.
Currently, Ukraine has one of the largest defense industries in Europe, producing its own drones, medium and long-range missiles, artillery systems, and ammunition. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said last month that the country now produces about 60% of what it needs at the front.
"In three years, we have transformed a small sector into a dynamic industry that has become the basis of our defense capabilities," Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Hvozdyar said on Monday.
Not all of these missing 40 percent come from the US, but enough to negatively impact Ukraine's ability to wage war if they are withdrawn.
Although Ukraine produces inexpensive anti-missiles, it still lacks its own ballistic missile interception capabilities. And to keep up, Kyiv needs partners to finance its domestic defense sector.
"Partner support is critical for the industry to maintain pace and build capacity," Hvozdyar said.
Melling also warned that the loss of US support would force Kyiv to improvise, which could cost lives. He said Ukraine could continue operations, but only by taking on "greater risk" and adjusting tactics in a way that would incur higher costs.
However, Ukraine's resilience is not in doubt. Skrypchenko noted that Ukraine continued to fight even with acute shortages of anti-aircraft interceptor missiles, ammunition, and other weapons, and despite constant Russian missile, bomb, and drone attacks.
The country "did not capitulate or fall," he said, which is a sign that Ukrainian forces will continue to resist even after Trump's departure.
Recall
On November 20, Axios published a 28-point peace plan by US President Donald Trump between Ukraine and Russia, which provides for territorial concessions, restrictions on Ukraine's armed forces, certain US guarantees, and economic components.
Against this backdrop, Ukraine and the US began negotiations in Geneva. The negotiations took place on November 23 and 24. Following the results, the initial 28-point peace plan of the US was reduced to 19 points.
The Ukrainian delegation, after a meeting with the US in Geneva, stated that there is a "common understanding regarding the key terms of the agreement," and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's visit to the US is expected "at the earliest possible date in November" to reach an agreement with Trump.
American media reported on November 25, citing an unnamed American official, that the Ukrainian side had agreed with the United States on the terms of a potential peace agreement.
This comes amid reports that Trump pressured Zelenskyy for a deal before the American Thanksgiving Day, November 27, although US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called this deadline flexible.
The President's Office stated that any discussions of territorial issues would likely take place at a meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and US President Donald Trump.