In a recent interview with the Italian daily “Corriere de la Sera” the very influential strategic advisor to President Putin and well- known security expert, Prof.Sergej Karaganov, underlined that Russia “is not leading a war against Ukraine, but in reality it is leading a war against Europe, the Europe of Napoleon and Hitler.” Despite President Trump’s erratic wavering, Karaganov stated, that Trump indeed did make a significant step towards peace in Anchorage (August 15) together with President Putin from Russia. “Trump knows, that Russia is obliged to win the war. Time is very short and so he has to make his choice: He is either with us (Russia) or with Europe,” Karaganov stated.
EU heads of state summit ending in disarray
A closer look at the recent EU heads of states summit in Brussels (October 23/24), reveals in a shocking way, that despite all the “narratives” spread around, there was no unity in the EU: What became visible was disarray, incompetence and above all a strong “posturing” of the EU leaders – who in reality know that they have catastrophically failed in the Ukraine war. The best proof for their incompetence is that for almost four years, not a single leader from Europe -except PM Orbán from Hungary- has tried to look for a diplomatic solution in the war, by actively trying to get into dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
In the final communiqué (23 Oct) the European Council states, that “the European Council underlines the critical need to ensure that Ukraine remains resilient and has the budgetary and military means to continue to exercise its inherent right of self- defense and counter Russia’s aggression.” It emphasizes in paragraph 7 that the EU “will continue to provide Ukraine with regular and predictable financial support in the long term. (…) In 2025 the European Union has provided to Ukraine’s budget EUR 20.5 billion, of which EUR 6.5 billion have been disbursed under the Ukraine Facility and EUR 14 billion under G7 ERA loans initiative which is repaid by the “windfall profits” stemming from immobilized Russian assets. Since the start of Russia’s war of aggression, the European Union and its member states have provided EUR 177,5 billion in support for Ukraine and its people.” This does not even count for the money given by the US. And now, when it becomes evident that Ukraine by 2026 will be broke, the EU has gone one further step ahead by trying to make use of the entire frozen Russian assets worth EUR 177 billion – trying to use them in form of a “backup for credit” given to Ukraine and guaranteed by each sovereign state in the EU Council.
The hasty push by German Chancellor F. Merz and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, to use Russia’s EUR 177 Billion immobilized assets, which are deposited in the “Euroclear”- Bank in Brussels, has not worked so far. Thanks to Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orbán and Slovak PM Fico, the final decision on the question how to use Russian assets met too much resistance and was hence postponed till the next EU heads of state summit in December (!). Thus, we read in paragraph 8 of the communiqué: “The European Council commits to address Ukraine’s pressing financing and needs for 2026- 2027, including for its military and defense efforts. Therefore, the European Council invites the Commission to present, as soon as possible, ‘options’ for financial support based on an assessment of Ukraine’s financing needs and invites the Commission and the Council to take work forward, in order for the European Council the revert to this issue at its next meeting. Subject to EU law, Russia’s assets should remain immobilized, until Russia ceases its war of aggression against Ukraine and compensates it for the damage caused by its war.”
The most vociferous rejection against the use of Russia’s Euro 170 billion assets came from Belgian Prime Minister De Wever, who in a 20-minute-long press conference (Oct 24th ) laid out why the whole “construct” primarily pushed forward by German Chancellor Merz and EU Commission President von der Leyen, won’t work. He emphasized that historically – even not during World War II- assets of enemy forces were used as “reparation” payments. Furthermore, according to de Wever, there are huge “legal obstacles”, given that Russia could likewise confiscate assets of foreign companies on its territory. 3rd what is also not clear is the question who would guarantee the seized assets, in case Russia wins the war. De Wever stated that this could only be guaranteed, in written form, by the individual sovreign nation states of the European Council and then presented to the Commission.
Orbán: “EU trapped in war psychosis”
After the EU summit Hungarian Minister President V. Orbán (who was chosen by Trump as host for a possible peace summit between Trump and Putin in Budapest E.H.) at a press conference in Brussels ( 24 October) heavily criticized the EU summit. He openly stated that Europe is “broke”, its leaders “trapped in a war psychosis”, while qualifying the EU sanctions policy against Russia as being totally “suicidal”. He underlined that Ukrainian President Zelensky who also attended the Brussels summit, “wants to draw as many countries as possible into the war. We are against this. We suggest that there be peace negotiations, which look for a concrete peace plan,” Orban stated. He also adamantly opposed the EU proposal as laid out in the final communiqué for the authorization of the frozen Russian financial assets at the Brussels based Euro Clear bank and would thus create a “precedence” case. Both he and Slovak PM Fico rejected to participate in new financial military assistance (except humanitarian aid) for Ukraine.
Orbán also categorically rejected that Ukraine becomes member of the EU. This would draw the entire EU into the war and be a safe way to escalate the war, he said. He also made a strong warning about the way in which Ukraine treats the Hungarian minority in the Karpatian region, having banned(!) the use of Hungarian language at Hungarian schools in Ukraine. Similarly Slovak PM Fico not only expressed full “solidarity” with Orbán concerning the need for a summit in Budapest, but he also adamantly spoke against escalating the war in Ukraine, pushed by the “coalition of the willing” (Starmer, Macron and Merz et al). Orbán underlined that the “peace summit” between Trump and Putin in Budapest which has been postponed in the meantime by Trump, is still being prepared. He deplored that none of the EU heads of states has made any effort to diplomatically talk to Putin.
European military experts: deeply sceptical about prolonging the war in Ukraine
It is worthwhile to listen and read what some of the most experienced military observers in Europe have to say about the actual war situation in Ukraine. Since more than 3 years they have been telling the truth, while their analysis has been harshly rejected and denied. From the beginning they have been telling that Ukraine is losing the war. That it can and will not win the war, even with EU and NATO support (except by a NATO fully declared war with global devasting consequences). Russia as it stands right now has de facto won the war and can dictate the terms of peace.
Among those military experts in Europe, there are former chairman of the NATO military committee, Bundeswehr General (ret.) Harald Kujat, Former Swiss Intelligence officer Colonel Jaques Baud who right from the beginning of the war had been analyzing competently how the Ukraine war was provoked and how the first Istanbul conference March 2022 had been sabotaged by the US and Great Britain. And there is the Swiss Colonel Ralph Brosshard, who also worked for OSCE. In Germany noteworthy is the 97-year-old former mayor of Hamburg and Minister under Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, Klaus von Dohnanyj (son of the famous resistance fighter against Hitler) who together with Brigadier General (ret.) Erich Vad, (former advisor of Chancellor Merkel) recently published a book: “War or Peace? Germany at a crossroad.”
In an article of “Nachdenkseiten” (10.10. 25), the author Tilo Gräser sheds light on the thinking of Kujat, Baud and Brosshard. As he puts it, all three experts are expressing regret that the Anchorage summit between Trump and Putin did not lead to the results, they had expected. They very much disliked that Trump had signaled his intent to support Ukraine with US Cruise Missiles, such as the Tomahawks (adding that Keith Kellogg, Trumps special envoy for Ukraine, had written 1rst October that the US would deliver “secret service data” for attacks against Russian Energy Infrastructure deep inside Russia.) According to Kujat, the US is doing this since a long time, as evidenced by the Ukraine attacks against Russia’s strategic early warning system and the strategic bomber fleet several months ago. Also, former Swiss Secret Service member, Col Jacques Baud, sees nothing new in Keegans statement. Both Kujat and Baud underlined that so far, the US did not give it’s go ahead for the use of long-range missiles (300- 500 km) for penetrating deep inside Russia.
Former Swiss Colonel and member of the OSCE, Ralph Brosshard, pointed out, that Kiew since 2024 “would like to get the whole world in a war with Russia”. The Ukraine delegation at the OSCE – in particular ambassador Igor Prokopchuk- as he emphasized, had tried for years, to win as many delegations as possible for the Ukraine support. But from 193 UN member states, only a group, i.e. those from EU and NATO member- states, are ready for such support.” And from the “EU and NATO states as- requests show – only very few are ready to enter into a war on the side of Ukraine against Russia.” If the Europeans finance the necessary weapons and buy them from the US this would be doubly profitable for the US. In terms of Tomahawks, Gen. Kujat pointed out that it’s more “complex,” than it sounds. “The Ukraine simply does not have the capability to fire Tomahawks deep inside Russia. (…) Originally intended for launch- based deployments, these missiles also are normally launched from destroyers and submarines, which Ukraine does not have at its disposal. The ground-based launch -system was recently developed for this purpose. According to this, there are currently only two operational Typhoon Batteries, with a third to be set up in Germany next year. The US is keen to retain a minimum stockpile for its own operations”, the former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee explained, adding “furthermore, they will certainly not take the risk of this new, sensitive technology, falling into Russian hands.”
According to Swiss Col. Brosshard deployment of US cruise missiles “means that the Americans would effectively determine which targets are attacked and which are not.” Kujat doubts that the cruise missiles could decide the war for Ukraine.” With its “superior potential in hypersonic weapons and short term and medium range missiles with independently controllable multiple warheads”, Russia offers “unparalleled escalation dominance. Neither the US nor the Ukrainian government seem to realize that a massive deployment of Tomahawk Cruise missiles could prompt Russia to use this enormous destructive potential. (Indeed, Putin in the presence of his Chief of Staff Gen.Gerassimow and other top generals, on Oct. 26th announced that successful tests had been concluded with the nuclear propelled – hypersonic? -15.000 km range “Burevestnik” missile!!), capable to destroy any target around the globe.)
Baud added that Zelensky like Netanyahu apparently follows a “nihilistic culture” and knows no boundaries, nor does anyone show them to him. Both are “willing to cause a global catastrophe, even if they cannot achieve their goals.” He also warned that an attack on the Russian leadership and the Kremlin would lead to a “very massive” response. And according to Russia’s revised nuclear strategy, this would meet the criteria for the use of nuclear weapons, that would have consequences for the whole of Europe.” Kujat also underlined that the West which insisted that Russia is drawing constantly “red lines”, but would not react if they were crossed, is totally “misjudging” Russia’s escalation strategy: “Russia has a ‘very high tolerance threshold’ and has so far responded with only minor escalation to Ukrainian attacks such as those on the airfields of the strategic bomber fleet. The use of Tomahawk cruise missiles against Russian strategic targets such as command centers would mark a turning point in Russia’s style of warfare. It could then actually shift from a war of attrition to a war of destruction”.
According to Swiss military expert Bosshard: “In the information war, Ukraine can escalate as much as it wants; even attacks with numerous civilian casualties and high collateral damage will be forgiven by the Western public.” He noted that “in a ‘real’ war, however, the Kremlin has escalation dominance and can go very far in Ukraine.” Kujat -as well as the other two colonels- advocates resuming negotiations to end the war. He currently sees another turning point in whether the war will end or continue to escalate, “with the risk that it will spread to the entire European continent.… But both sides must take steps towards each other. We (Europeans) have neither been willing nor able to come up with pour own proposal, whatever from it might take in three and a half years.” Indeed, Germany is being prepared for war mentally and “Europeans are now prisoners of their own strategy less actions.”
Wiesbaden 25th October 2025
