Crowds gather to view destruction in an Odesa residential area that included a university student residence (photo: Anna Beria, with thanks).  

We are possibly reaching the culmination point of Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine.

After almost five years of warfare, Ukrainian resilience is being put ever more to the test. Ukraine’s forces are edging forward, regaining lost land in the Donbas from Russia’s armed forces. Not winning on the ground, Putin has declared unlimited warfare on Ukraine’s civilian population to terrorise them into submission, destroying critical infrastructure and causing mayhem as winter approaches.

Ukraine’s position is being further undermined much more overtly by Donald Trump, who has just now lifted sanctions on Russian diesel in an attempt to save his neck on the US mid-term election due on 3^rd November. His showdown with President Zelenskyy over this issue had led to the US denying Ukraine access to Starshield, the military version of Starlink, in a move which one Ukrainian officer said is “comparable to a nuclear strike against us”. Trump seems to have backed down but nobody knows if it will be cut again and for how long, as Trump strives to end the war on Russia’s terms so he can pursue his business deals with Putin.

Money is critical factor for all sides. The EU and Ukraine have agreed that Ukraine’s needs can be met for the rest of this year. The Ukraine parliament has just passed some anti-corruption measures which should help the Ukraine’s government’s credibility in being able to use international assistance. But 2027 is underfunded. The ascendance of pro-Russian parties across much of the EU poses a threat to future budgetary support to Ukraine. French presidential front-runner Marine Le Pen has said France will stop funding Ukraine if she becomes President. Even if US Democrats win both Houses of Congress, it is by no means assured that the US will restore funding for Ukraine, which Donald Trump can stall even if it were to pass both Houses. The outlook for 2027 is uncertain.

That is why it is more critical than ever that Russia’s frozen assets are permanently confiscated and fully deployed in support of Ukraine. This would put them out of reach of Trump’s business schemes with Russia if a settlement ceasing the war were to be reached in Putin’s favour.

If Ukraine were to fall, it would have profound implications for the UK and its European Union partners.

Western Ukraine could remain free for a while but its population would be demoralised and exhausted, obliged to hold its postponed presidential and parliamentary elections under relentless covert pressure from Russia to elect a political class which it can manipulate. Trump would push Europe to return frozen Russian assets (his business associates Witkoff and Kushner have already suggested transferring them to US jurisdiction, which has thankfully been rejected by EU envoys) which, if the UK and Europe were forced to accede to one day as part of a “peace settlement”, would revive Russia’s broken economy and allow Russian to push forward with new foreign adventures with a fully-mobilised battle-hardened army.

Putin is already testing NATO’s resolve with hybrid attacks in Europe which are becoming bolder every day. Now drones are regularly flying into NATO allies’ airspace to test NATO’s reaction. Cargo ships in Bulgarian and Romanian territorial waters are being hit. Polish Prime Minister Tusk expects a mass casualty incident to occur as part of Russia’s escalation of the war.

All to say that the UK’s armed forces must be funded properly right now to be ready in case kinetic war with Russia breaks out already in 2027.

This is especially true as the UK leads the Joint Expeditionary Force, a multinational land, sea and air operation outside NATO, excluding US troops, covering the Arctic and High North, North Atlantic and the Baltic Sea region, with British troops based in Estonia. If there were to be any limited or major incursion by Russia into the Baltics, it would be obliged to react, thereby putting the UK automatically on course for war with Russia.

Given this is a growing possibility as we approach 2027, it seems ridiculous that we are spending increases in our defence expenditure mainly on systems which will only be ready by the mid-2030’s. Instead, we must ensure with utmost speed that our existing limited numbers of troops are properly trained in modern warfare, equipped with latest weapons technology and significant stocks of ammunition. If our armed forces are not given adequate means to protect themselves, the UK government will need to take full responsibility for the level of British and other nations’ casualties that will ensue under its command.

Let us be honest. Despite the fine words spoken by Supreme Allied Commander Europe US General Alexus Grynkewich at the Warsaw security summit this week, Trump is US Commander-in-Chief and will not allow the United States military to fight if NATO countries’ borders are further violated. In this respect, this assumption, central to the UK 2025 Strategic Defence Review, needs considerable reformulation. And the UK needs to be ready to take on its responsibilities, and not just with words.

* George Cunningham is Chair of Lib Dem Friends of Armed Forces and Honorary President of Lib Dem Overseas. He was formerly an European External Action Service official, based in Brussels.