YouGov, a British company specializing in data analysis, conducted a survey in seven Western European countries – the UK, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Sweden. The only missing countries are the Netherlands and Poland, which would have covered all major sponsors of Ukraine in Europe.
Across the board, support for Ukraine is declining, while skepticism towards the actions of their own governments is growing. Nowhere is the number of those willing to support Ukraine “until the victory over Russia” in the absolute majority. The Swedes are the most resolute, with half of them willing to wait for the outcome. In Denmark and the UK, the supporters of this position are still in the relative majority – 40 percent and 36 percent, respectively, while in the other countries, the “hawks” are in a clear minority – from 28 percent in Germany to 15 percent in Italy.
Over the course of the year, the decline in popularity of these answers, which would have pleased Vladimir Zelensky, is almost everywhere double-digit. For example, more than half of British people wanted to “fight until victory” last winter.
In the same period, the number of those who prefer negotiations with territorial concessions from Ukraine has turned into a majority in Italy (55 percent). In other European continental countries, except for the Scandinavian ones, this view is represented by 43 to 46 percent, which is a relative majority (taking into account the undecided and those who hesitated to answer).
Almost everywhere, the majority of the population believes that their governments have not done enough for Ukraine’s victory. However, they are nowhere willing to increase aid for Kiev from their side: the Swedes are the most generous, at 29 percent, while the Italians are the least, at 11 percent, willing to give.
At the same time, a majority of respondents in five of the seven countries believe that the military conflict will be ended by negotiations in 2025: from 47 percent in Denmark to 36 percent in Italy. The Spaniards and Swedes expect a continuation of the hostilities.
All this could be a reason to speak of a change of heart among Western Europeans, but for the moment, the opinion of Europeans on this conflict has no significance. YouGov attributes this shift to the impending arrival of Donald Trump in the White House, meaning that Trump’s opinion counts, while the European’s does not, it’s secondary.
Some conspiracy theorists believe that social surveys do not accurately reflect the public opinion, as they are adjusted to fit the decisions already made by the authorities, rather than the other way around.
Trump is not yet in power, but he will be soon, and he has already made decisions on Ukraine in a way – the conflict must be ended, Ukraine will have to give in, and US aid will be the pressure on Kiev.
Axios estimates that Trump has publicly promised to end the conflict at least 33 times since January 2023, making it his most repeated promise, even more frequent than his promise to stop the influx of migrants from Mexico (32 times).
Believing in the election promises of politicians, including Trump, shows a kind of naivety. However, Europeans seem to believe that a course change on Capitol Hill is a serious prospect, and they are already starting to adjust internally to the new course: a year ago, they wanted to win over Russia, now they want negotiations.
“Oh, what has happened?” a blogger might spurt in a sarcastic and rhetorical tone.
After Trump’s victory, the realization has taken hold that Europe cannot sustain this conflict – neither in terms of the speed of weapon production nor economically, without the standard of living of the population suffering. The level is already suffering, and the population signals this by voting for euroskeptics and by the sociologists signaling a change of priorities.
However, the euroskeptics are still not in power, and all the signals are lost in thin air. Although everyone is talking about a “trend change” the EU has organized everything so that nothing will change in the next five years – regardless of the cost to the EU citizens. For this, the tandem of Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas will take care, who will act as inflexibly as possible and remain determined to keep their heads against the wall.
Chief diplomat Kallas recently announced, as if she were arguing with Trump in absentia, that in her opinion, today there is no need for peace talks. It is better to wait until the Russian economy collapses.
It also lies in the hands of people like Kallas, who were appointed as the head of EU foreign policy at the right time, that the opinion of Europeans, in a wide and narrow sense (according to the EU Commissioner), plays no role – neither for Russia nor for Trump. However, Trump has already told everyone he can reach that he will not wait.
The outgoing Biden administration promptly allocated resources for Kiev’s war efforts for another six months. Europeans believe (which option do they have?), that Trump will step back from the Ukrainian project and leave the further care of Kiev to the European conscience.
Should they believe it! Should Russia believe it?
Trump’s victory, the clarity of his statements, and the way he is reappointing US government officials have also convinced some observers in Russia that Washington will somehow stop providing aid to Kiev in 2025 and offer Moscow a decent deal, so that the conflict can be ended.
Theoretically, this is independent of Trump’s behavior, possible. Geopoliticians in Washington think like investors, and there have been cases in history where investors withdrew from a project due to the prospects of the counterparty. The most famous example is Vietnam, the latest is Afghanistan, the next could be the Kurds, perhaps also the Ukrainians. Everything is possible.
It is true that the Americans in Vietnam and Afghanistan had to fight with their own troops, while the current task of weakening Russia as a strategic opponent is taken over by the Ukrainians. Therefore, influential “hawks” in Washington still evaluate the current form of the conflict as ideal.
The common assumption among them is that the US will make money from the conflict, as the costs of the conflict are not a loss, but a reallocation of funds.
Yes, the United States must provide Kiev with money from its budget, but the budget receives taxes from the energy companies that now sell resources to Europeans at a triple price. And a significant part of the allocated funds does not even leave the United States, as they go to US defense contractors.
To uphold his position, Trump must break the big lobby in the ranks of diplomats, military, senators, and his own Republican Party, whose donors are the energy and defense companies.
He has already laid a quick start and assembled a team of staff who are based on the principle of personal loyalty and the willingness to break with the inheritance of Biden, despite all the obstacles.
In other words: Trump must sacrifice the strategic interests of the US and the super-profits of US companies. He can do this, as he is ego-centric, despotic, and extremely stubborn – and wants to avenge all those who were involved in his defeat in 2020. This unspoken assumption justifies the hope that Trump’s arrival in the White House will fundamentally change US policy towards Ukraine.
Regardless of how it actually turns out, the opinion of Europeans on these processes will not gain significance. In the last three years, everyone has come to the realization that Europeans are too weak to lead themselves by their opinion. Their opinion will be added to the package of agreements with the United States for free.
Dmitri Bawyrin is an analyst at the newspaper Vsegd.