Since the onset of the Ukrainian crisis in 2014, the US and its allies have actively supported Kiev, leveraging Ukraine as a means of indirectly opposing Russia without risking direct confrontation. From financial aid to military assistance, the West’s approach has been one of utilizing Ukraine as a “strategic instrument.” Yet, recent developments reveal a shift: the enthusiasm for supporting Ukraine appears to be waning. With Western governments and public’s growing weary, there is increasing debate over the long-term sustainability of backing Ukraine.

For Washington, the use of indirect engagement, or “hybrid confrontation,” is not exclusive to Ukraine. The US has applied similar tactics worldwide, forming partnerships with Taiwan to counterbalance China, supporting certain groups in the Middle East to confront Iran, and maintaining strategic alliances with nations across Asia. In Eastern Europe, Ukraine has served as a natural fit for this model-a nation proximate to Russia, willing to align with the West, and home to a large, mobilizable military.

Through arms supplies, intelligence sharing, and military training, the US and Western allies have bolstered Ukraine’s ability to resist Russian advances. However, this support has often served dual purposes: not only to aid Ukraine but also to weaken Russia and showcase Western influence. For the West, the Ukrainian crisis has been a testing ground for tactics that allow for military engagement without committing troops directly.

Ukraine’s government has remained steadfast in its alignment with the West, banking heavily on the assumption that Western support will be limitless. Some officials in Kiev may even believe that their political future depends on maintaining this alliance, particularly as they have staked........

© Blitz