The war on Ukraine was a big topic at Vladimir Putin’s annual televised question and answer session, but the Russian president wouldn’t say if the war is coming to an end.
Published On 19 Dec 202519 Dec 2025
Share
Singapore has reported a growing number of “rogue” or “shadow fleet” tankers operating off its shores in and around one of the world’s busiest maritime corridors.
According to Lloyd’s List Intelligence data cited by international maritime authorities, at least 27 such ships transited the Singapore Strait in early December, with another 130 clustered nearby around Indonesia’s Riau Archipelago.
list of 4 itemsend of list
While traffic through the strait remains dense and appears outwardly routine – more than 80,000 vessels pass through it each year – ship-spotters and analysts say the profile of some of the ships using these waters has recently changed.
Conflict in Ukraine and the Middle East has sparked a surge in Western sanctions on oil exports from countries such as Russia and Iran. The European Commission and the United States Trump administration have both recently renewed or extended sanctions against Venezuelan oil, as well.
As a result, a parallel, unofficial maritime network has emerged to keep sanctioned oil moving.
The Singapore Strait is a vital artery for global maritime trade, carrying about one-third of the world’s traded goods at some point along their journeys. For tankers at sea, it is almost unavoidable – the strait is a natural gateway between the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea, also a busy trade artery.
The Maritime and Port Authority monitors vessel movements within Singaporean waters. But international law limits what action it can take once ships move into the high seas – in effect, international waters – allowing shadow fleets to thrive in regulatory grey zones.
In recent weeks, suspect shipping activity has been noted just beyond Singapore’s territorial waters – roughly 22.2 kilometres from its coast – in international waters, just outside of the city state’s law enforcement reach.
As a result of record sanctions by Western governments in recent years over Russia’s war in Ukraine, Iran’s nuclear programme and, most recently, United States President Donald Trump’s campaign against Venezuela, the number of falsely flagged ships globally has more than doubled this year to more than 450, most of them tankers, according to the International Maritime Organization database.
All vessels at sea are required to fly a flag showing the legal jurisdiction governing their operations in international waters. The body which grants ship nationalities is the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
A shadow ship, or “ghost” ship, is typically an ageing vessel with obscure ownership. These vessels frequently change flags – for instance, when the US seized the tanker, Skipper, off the coast of Venezuela earlier this month, the government of Guyana, Venezuela’s neighbour, said it was “falsely flying the Guyana flag”, and clarified that it was not registered in the country.
Operators of shadow ships also falsify registration details, broadcast false geo-location codes, or even switch off tracking systems altogether to evade detection and skirt UNCLOS laws.
These vessels typically carry sanctioned oil and other restricted goods such as military equipment. They often conduct risky ship-to-ship transfers of cargo under the cover of night to avoid detection. This can create serious safety and environmental risks.
Additionally, most of the tankers are owned by shell companies in jurisdictions such as Dubai, where rapid buying and selling by anonymous or newly formed firms can take place, making it even harder to trace their origins.
Jennifer Parker, a specialist in maritime law at Australia’s University of New South Wales, said the increasing number of shadow fleets presents a “real challenge”.
Parker told Al Jazeera that “finding out who owns them and who insures them has been incredibly difficult because of the [murky] paper trail around them”.
She added that “often they would do what is called bunkering, which is the process of transferring fuel at sea between ships. So that makes it hard to track where that ship has actually come from and where that oil has come from.”
She added: “Sometimes, what they do is actually mix oil, so you will have a legitimate ship that will do a ship-to-ship transfer at sea with a shadow fleet and they will mix the oil so it becomes hard to really trace where that oil has come from … to avoid sanctions.”
When ageing, uninsured vessels are involved in accidents, it can lead to environmental disasters like oil spills.
According to Bunkerspot, a specialist maritime publication, a shadow tanker spill, which can cause enormous damage to water, wildlife and local coastlines, can cost up to $1.6bn in response and cleanup alone.
Last December, Russian authorities scrambled to contain an oil spill in the Kerch Strait caused by two 50-year-old tankers which had been damaged during a heavy weekend storm. The scale of the environmental damage and the associated cleanup costs remain unclear.
In addition to vessel collisions, they can cause environmental damage through chemical leaks and illegal waste dumping.
Russia is the primary beneficiary of ghost fleet trading. Moscow has largely maintained its oil exports despite Western sanctions, ensuring steady revenue for its war in Ukraine. Though not to the same extent, Iran and Venezuela also sell fossil fuels using ghost fleets.
China and India, currently the largest buyers of Russian crude, benefit from steep discounts, often purchasing oil well below the Western-imposed $60 per barrel price cap, which was imposed in December 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Tracking by S&P Global and Ukrainian intelligence shows that Russia relied heavily on its shadow tanker fleet in 2025. India has been the main destination, importing about 5.4 million tonnes (or 55 percent of Russian crude oil sales via shadow tankers) between January and September.
China has taken a smaller but still significant share of about 15 percent. Overall, most Russian seaborne crude now moves outside Group of Seven (G7)-compliant shipping, underscoring the shadow fleet’s central role in this trade.
To avoid enforcement of sanctions, many shadow tankers have moved out of major shipping lanes. In part, this is down to European authorities now requiring physical inspections during ship-to-ship transfers, making it riskier for these vessels to operate on conventional routes.
For instance, Denmark, Sweden, Poland, Finland and Estonia recently began carrying out insurance checks on tankers transiting the Gulf of Finland and the waters between Sweden and Denmark. This is aimed at ensuring compliance with 2022 sanctions on Russian oil.
Meanwhile, in July 2025, the United Kingdom imposed measures – such as restrictions on access to UK ports, insurance and financial services – on 135 shadow fleet vessels and two linked firms, aiming to reduce Russia’s shipping capacity and cut its energy earnings.
In the US, President Donald Trump has warned that comparable measures will follow if Russia refuses to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine, raising the prospect of closer transatlantic coordination with the UK and Europe against shadow fleets.
Ukrainian military successes and Russian narratives clashed this week, as Moscow’s assertion of inevitable victory flew in the face of facts on the ground.
Ukraine steadily took back control of almost all of its northern city of Kupiansk after isolating Russian forces within it, belying Russian claims to have seized it.
Russian forces were also unable to dislodge Ukrainian defenders from the eastern city of Pokrovsk to back up Moscow’s claims of total control.
And Moscow attempted to deny Ukraine’s successful use of an underwater unmanned vehicle to severely damage a Kilo-class submarine, despite visual evidence.
Ukrainian forces operating in the northern Kharkiv region said they had cut Russian logistics to Kupiansk, surrounded a vanguard of 200 Russians inside it, and cleared Russian forces out of forests north of the city on December 12.
Geolocated footage showed Ukrainian forces advancing in the city the following day and taking back the southern suburb of Yuvileynyi, pushing Russian troops to the northern and western suburbs.
The Russian position had become more precarious by Monday. Ukrainian forces said they prevented reinforcements from entering the city through a gas pipeline, a tactic Russia had used in the siege of Chasiv Yar, and the isolated Russian troops were being supplied solely by drone. Ukraine’s General Staff said its forces were still repelling Russian attacks on Friday.
Russia’s Ministry of Defence insisted it had control of the situation. “Units of the Zapad Group of Forces exercise reliable control over all districts of liberated Kupiansk,” it said on Monday, claiming that Ukraine’s efforts to enter the city from the south were being suppressed.
“The only thing that can be said for sure is that the Russian Armed Forces are still holding part of the centre and north of Kupiansk, but most of it is already either in the grey zone or under the control of the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” wrote a Russian military reporter on the Telegram messaging app.
On Wednesday this week, Colonel General Oleksandr Syrskii, Ukraine’s Army commander-in-chief, told a Ramstein-format of Ukraine’s allies that his forces had taken back 90 percent of Kupiansk. At the same time in Moscow, Russian Defence Minister Andrei Belousov was telling Russian President Vladimir Putin that “the enemy is unsuccessfully trying to regain” the city.
“The Russian Defense Minister, Belousov, continues to lie that Russia controls Kupiansk,” wrote Andrii Kovalenko, head of Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation, on Telegram. “In reality, most of the city is controlled by the Ukrainian Defense Forces, which are continuing to clear it of Russians. However, all of Putin’s officials, from [commander-in-chief Valery] Gerasimov, who was the first to lie about controlling the city, to Belousov, continue to lie in the presence of Putin himself.”
Contrary to the available evidence, Belousov also insisted that Russia had seized Pokrovsk, which Russia calls Krasnoarmeysk, and was on the cusp of vanquishing neighbouring Myrnohrad, which Russia calls Dimitrov. Both towns are in the eastern Donetsk region, and are almost surrounded by Russian forces to the north, south and east.
“Russian soldiers continue to inflict fire damage on Ukrainian troops in Dimitrov, the last stronghold of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Krasnoarmeysk agglomeration,” Belousov told Putin.
But Syrskii told allies that Ukrainian forces had regained about 16 square kilometres (6 square miles) in the northern part of Pokrovsk and 56sq km (22sq miles) west of the city. “Logistics in Myrnograd are complex, but the operations continue,” he wrote.
Russia had claimed complete control over Pokrovsk on December 2 and was sticking to its story.
A third point of contention was Ukraine’s successful use of an underwater unmanned vehicle (UUV) to strike a Russian Kilo-class submarine on Monday (December 15), in what is considered the first such attack in military history.
Video of the Russian fleet at anchor in the port of Novorossiysk on the Black Sea shows a huge explosion in the stern section of the submarine.
Ukraine’s State Security Service later claimed credit for the attack.
However, Russia’s Defence Ministry said: “Not a single ship or submarine as well as the crews of the Black Sea Fleet stationed in the bay of the Novorossiysk naval base were damaged as a result of the sabotage.”
The ministry published footage of what it said was the attacked submarine, in which it appeared undamaged above the surface, but the video did not show the stern section.
Ukraine’s long-range strikes against Russia scored other successes, on which Russia did not comment.
Ukraine struck the oil refinery in Yaroslavl, northeast of Moscow, on December 12. On Sunday, Ukrainian drones struck the Afipsky refinery in Krasnodar Krai and the Uryupinsk oil depot in Volgograd, causing explosions in both locations. They also struck the Dorogobuzhskaya power plant in Smolensk.
United States and Ukrainian negotiating teams met for two days in Berlin on Sunday and Monday. Russian officials said they would be briefed next week on the results of those talks.
But even as it claimed to be interested in ongoing peace negotiations, Russia clearly signalled that it plans to continue aggressive operations next year.
“The key task for the next year is to maintain and increase the pace of the offensive,” said Belousov in Putin’s presence on Wednesday, at an expanded meeting of the Defence Ministry Board.
“It wasn’t us who started the war in 2022; it was the destructive forces in Ukraine, with the support of the West – essentially, the West itself that unleashed this war,” Putin said. “We are only trying to finish it, to put an end to it.”
Putin said “the goals of the special military operation will certainly be achieved,” and “Russia will achieve the liberation of its historical lands by military means,” suggesting there was little room for compromise on Moscow’s side.
Putin’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov signalled the same thing in an interview with ABC on Tuesday. He said Europe and Ukraine expected a “deep and very wrong” revision of Russian peace proposals, and ruled out conceding seized Ukrainian land.
“We are not able in any form to compromise on this, because it would be, in our view, a revision of a very fundamental element of our statehood, set forth through our constitution,” Naryshkin said.
Russia has attempted to give the impression that it has inexhaustible manpower with which to prosecute the war it started in Ukraine.
Belousov said almost 410,000 Russians volunteered for military service, exceeding expectations for 2025.
That translates to 32,800 per month. “Data from the Ukrainian General Staff on Russian losses indicate that Russian forces suffered an average of 34,600 casualties per month between January and November 2025 – suggesting that Belousov’s recruitment numbers are not quite replacing Russian losses,” wrote the Institute for the Study of War, a Washington-based think tank.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy suggested most of these casualties were deaths. “[Putin] spends around 30,000 soldiers’ lives on the front every month. Not wounded – 30,000 killed each month… We have drone footage confirming these deaths,” he told Dutch parliamentarians.
Syrski also doubted Russian recruitment quotas were sufficient.
“The number of Russian troops has long been around 710,000,” he wrote on Telegram. “However, the enemy has not been able to increase this figure, despite active recruitment in Russia, because our soldiers are ‘reducing’ the number of occupiers by a thousand every day through deaths and injuries.”
Russian leader underscores Kremlin’s hardline stance on peace talks as Trump pushes for deal to end war.
Published On 19 Dec 202519 Dec 2025
Share
Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking at his highly choreographed annual question-and-answer session in Moscow, has said his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskyy refuses to discuss territorial concessions.
The comments were made on Friday during the “Results of the Year” event, where Putin fielded questions from millions of Russians on topics ranging from domestic policy to the war.
list of 3 itemsend of list
Putin’s remarks are the latest in a drumbeat of often-repeated maximalist Russian positions nearly four years after he ordered troops into the neighbouring country, as United States President Donald Trump intensifies diplomatic efforts to broker a peace deal between Moscow and Kyiv.
The issue of territory gained, lost, to be ceded or not, delves into the heart of the matter on one of the most contentious issues in the talks to end the war so far.
“We know from statements from Zelenskyy that he’s not prepared to discuss territory issues,” Putin told attendees at the event in the capital’s Gostiny Dvor exhibition hall. Zelenskyy has indeed stated that clearly, but Ukraine’s constitution also forbids the ceding of land.
Putin has demanded Ukraine cede all territory in four key regions his forces have captured and occupied, along with Crimea, which Moscow seized and annexed in 2014.
He also wants Ukrainian troops to withdraw from parts of eastern Ukraine that Russian forces have not yet taken in the eastern Donetsk region, where fighting remains attritional – conditions Kyiv has rejected outright.
Putin projected confidence about battlefield progress, saying Russian forces had “fully seized strategic initiative” and would make further gains before the year ends.
Moscow’s larger army has made steady advances in recent months, seizing between 12 and 17 square kilometres (4.5 and 6.6 square miles) daily in 2025, according to Western assessments.
The Russian president also attacked Western handling of frozen Russian assets, labelling plans to use them for Ukraine as “robbery” rather than theft because it was being done openly.
“Whatever they stole, they’ll have to give it back someday,” he said, pledging to pursue legal action in courts he described as “independent of political decisions”.
European Union leaders agreed to provide a hefty $105bn interest-free loan to Ukraine to meet its military and economic needs in its war with Russia for the next two years, EU Council President Antonio Costa said.
The leaders decided early on Friday to borrow cash on capital markets to fund Ukraine’s defence against Russia rather than use frozen Russian assets, diplomats said.
The annual event, which Putin has held in different formats since 2001, drew about three million questions from Russians via phone, text and online platforms. An artificial intelligence system processed the queries to identify common themes.
Putin’s comments come at a pivotal moment, and are watched closely by Western officials who will want to get a read on how he intends to present the situation on the ground to the Russian public.
Trump has launched a major diplomatic push to end nearly four years of fighting, but negotiations have stalled over sharply conflicting demands from Moscow and Kyiv.
US officials estimate that Russia and Ukraine have suffered more than two million casualties since Moscow launched its invasion in February 2022. Neither side discloses reliable loss figures.
These are the key developments from day 1,394 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.
Published On 19 Dec 202519 Dec 2025
Share
Here is where things stand on Friday, December 19:
In the quiet village of Kozubivka in Ukraine’s Poltava region, Nelia and her husband Oleksandr open their home to people displaced from Kharkiv, where bombing and shelling have forced thousands to flee.
But rebuilding a life in rural Ukraine is not easy. City people must learn to navigate unfamiliar routines on the farm, endure physical labour and bear the emotional weight of displacement. In the process tempers flare despite moments of tenderness.
Through these intimate encounters, Guests from Kharkiv reveals what it means to create community in the middle of a war and the courage it takes to adapt to a new way of life.
A documentary short by Halyna Lavrinets, produced by Eleron Pictures.
Published On 18 Dec 202518 Dec 2025
Share
Legislation reflects Democrats’ efforts to seek tighter oversight of Trump administration’s military action.
The United States Senate has passed a $901bn bill setting defence policy and spending for the 2026 fiscal year, combining priorities backed by President Donald Trump’s administration with provisions designed to preserve congressional oversight of US military power.
The National Defense Authorisation Act (NDAA) was approved in a 77-20 vote on Wednesday with senators adopting legislation passed by the House of Representatives last month. It now goes to Trump for his signature.
list of 4 itemsend of list
Several provisions in the bill reflect efforts by Democratic lawmakers, supported by some Republicans, to constrain how quickly the Trump administration may scale back US military commitments in Europe.
The bill requires the Pentagon to maintain at least 76,000 US soldiers in Europe unless NATO allies are consulted and the administration determines that a reduction would be in the US national interest. The US typically stations 80,000 to 100,000 soldiers across the continent. A similar measure prevents reductions in US troop levels in South Korea below 28,500 soldiers.
Congress also reinforced its backing for Ukraine, authorising $800m under the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative with $400m allocated for each of the next two years. A further $400m per year was approved to manufacture weapons for Ukraine, signalling continued congressional support for Kyiv and cementing Washington’s commitment to Europe’s defence.
The bill also reflects priorities aligned with the Trump administration’s national security strategy, which places the Asia Pacific at the centre of US foreign policy and describes the region as a key economic and geopolitical battleground.
In line with that approach, the NDAA provides $1bn for the Taiwan Security Cooperation Initiative, aimed at strengthening defence cooperation as the US seeks to counter China’s growing military influence.
The legislation authorises $600m in security assistance for Israel, including funding for joint missile defence programmes, such as the Iron Dome, a measure that has long drawn broad bipartisan support in Congress.
The NDAA increases reporting requirements on US military activity, an area in which Democrats in particular have sought greater oversight.
It directs the Department of Defense to provide Congress with additional information on strikes targeting suspected smuggling and trafficking operations in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific, adding pressure on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to provide lawmakers with video footage of US strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats operating in international waters near Venezuela.
Lawmakers moved to strengthen oversight after a September strike killed two people who had survived an earlier attack on their boat.
Some Democratic lawmakers said they were not briefed in advance on elements of the campaign, prompting calls for clearer reporting requirements.
The legislation repeals the 2003 authorisation for the US invasion of Iraq and the 1991 authorisation for the Gulf War. Supporters from both parties said the repeals reduce the risk of future military action being undertaken without explicit congressional approval.
The bill also permanently lifts US sanctions on Syria imposed during the regime of President Bashar al-Assad after the Trump administration’s earlier decision to temporarily ease restrictions. Supporters argue the move will support Syria’s reconstruction after al-Assad’s removal from power a year ago.
Other provisions align more closely with priorities advanced by Trump and Republican lawmakers under the administration’s America First agenda.
The NDAA eliminates diversity, equity and inclusion offices and training programmes within the Department of Defense, including the role of chief diversity officer. The House Armed Services Committee claims the changes would save about $40m.
The bill also cuts $1.6bn from Pentagon programmes related to climate change. While the US military has previously identified climate-related risks as a factor affecting bases and operations, the Trump administration and Republican leaders have said defence spending should prioritise immediate military capabilities.
These are the key developments from day 1,392 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.
Published On 17 Dec 202517 Dec 2025
Share
Here is where things stand on Wednesday, December 17:
The Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant in Ukraine is currently receiving electricity through only one of two external power lines, the facility’s Russian management said, after the other line was disconnected due to military activity.
Exiled punk band says its members are proud to be branded ‘extremists’ and hits back at Putin as an ‘aging sociopath’.
A Moscow district court has designated Russian punk protest band Pussy Riot as an extremist organisation, according to the state TASS news agency.
The exiled group’s lawyer, Leonid Solovyov, told TASS that Monday’s court ruling was made in response to claims brought by the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office and that the band plans to appeal. According to TASS, the case was heard in a closed session at the request of the Prosecutor General’s Office.
list of 4 itemsend of list
The court said that it had upheld prosecution submissions “to recognise the punk band Pussy Riot as an extremist organisation and ban its activities on the territory of the Russian Federation”, the AFP news agency reports.
An official Pussy Riot social media account shared a statement, responding defiantly to the ruling, saying the band’s members, who have lived in exile for years, were “freer than those who try to silence us”.
“We can say what I think about putin — that he is an aging sociopath spreading his venom around the world like cancer,” the statement said.
“In today’s Russia, telling the truth is extremism. So be it – we’re proud extremists, then.”
The group’s designation will make it easier for the authorities to go after the band’s supporters in Russia or people who have worked with them in the past.
“This court order is designed to erase the very existence of Pussy Riot from the minds of Russians,” the band said. “Owning a balaclava, having our song on your computer, or liking one of our posts could lead to prison time.”
According to TASS, earlier reports said that the Prosecutor General’s Office had brought the case over Pussy Riot’s previous actions, including at Christ the Saviour Cathedral in February 2012, and the World Cup Final in Moscow in 2018.
Today Russian court designated Pussy Riot as an extremist organization.
And yet, we’re freer than those who try to silence us. We can say what I think about putin — that he is an aging sociopath spreading his venom around the world like cancer. In today’s Russia, telling the… pic.twitter.com/ymz3BbApTo
— 𝖕𝖚𝖘𝖘𝖞 𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖙💦 (@pussyrrriot) December 15, 2025
The band’s members have already served sentences for the 2012 protest at the cathedral in Moscow, where they played what they called a punk prayer, “Mother of God, Cast Putin Out!”
Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria Alyokhina, who were jailed for two years on hooliganism charges over the cathedral protest, were released as part of a 2013 amnesty, which extended to some 26,000 people facing prosecution from Russian authorities, including 30 Greenpeace crew members.
In September, a Russian court handed jail terms to five people linked with Pussy Riot – Maria Alyokhina, Taso Pletner, Olga Borisova, Diana Burkot and Alina Petrova – after finding them guilty of spreading “false information” about the Russian military, news outlet Mediazona reported. All have said the charges against them are politically motivated.
Mediazona was founded by Alyokhina alongside fellow band member Tolokonnikova.
The news outlet says that it is continuing to maintain a verified list of Russian military deaths in Moscow’s war on Ukraine.
“We have confirmed 153,000 names, each supported by evidence, context, and documentation,” Mediazona said on Monday.
These are the key developments from day 1,391 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.
Published On 16 Dec 202516 Dec 2025
Share
Here is where things stand on Tuesday, December 16:
US President Donald Trump has said that an agreement to end Russia’s war on Ukraine is “closer than ever” after key leaders held talks in Berlin, but several officials said that significant differences remain over territorial issues.
Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Monday that he had “very long and very good talks” with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the leaders of France, Germany, the United Kingdom and NATO.
list of 4 itemsend of list
“We’re having tremendous support from European leaders. They want to get it [the war] ended also,” he said.
“We had numerous conversations with President [Vladimir] Putin of Russia, and I think we’re closer now than we have been, ever, and we’ll see what we can do.”
Zelenskyy had earlier said that negotiations with US and European leaders were difficult but productive.
The high-level discussions, involving Zelenskyy, a US delegation led by envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and European leaders, took place in Berlin over two days amid mounting pressure from Washington for Kyiv to make concessions to Moscow to end one of Europe’s deadliest conflicts since World War II.
In a statement following the talks, European leaders said they and the US were committed to working together to provide “robust security guarantees” to Ukraine, including a European-led “multinational force Ukraine” supported by the US.
They said the force’s work would include “operating inside Ukraine” as well as assisting in rebuilding Ukraine’s forces, securing its skies and supporting safer seas. They said that Ukrainian forces should remain at a peacetime level of 800,000.
Two US officials, speaking to the Reuters news agency, described the proposed protections as “Article 5-like”, a reference to NATO’s Article 5 mutual defence pledge.
Ukraine had earlier signalled it may be willing to abandon its ambition to join the NATO military alliance in exchange for firm Western security guarantees.
Speaking to reporters in Berlin, Zelenskyy said that Kyiv needed a clear understanding of the security guarantees on offer before making any decisions on territorial control under a potential peace settlement. He added that any guarantees must include effective ceasefire monitoring.
Ukrainian officials have been cautious about what form such guarantees could take. Ukraine received security assurances backed by the US and Europe after gaining independence in 1991, but those did not prevent Russia’s invasions in 2014 and 2022.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Washington had offered “considerable” security guarantees during the Berlin talks.
“What the US has placed on the table here in Berlin, in terms of legal and material guarantees, is really considerable,” Merz said at a joint news conference with Zelenskyy.
“We now have the chance for a real peace process,” he said, adding that territorial arrangements remain a central issue. “Only Ukraine can decide about territorial concessions. No ifs or buts.”
Merz also said it was essential for the European Union to reach an agreement on using frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine to demonstrate to Moscow that continuing the war is futile. He warned that EU members must share the risks involved in appropriating those assets, or risk damaging the bloc’s reputation.
Meanwhile, the EU has adopted new sanctions targeting companies and individuals accused of helping Russia circumvent Western restrictions on oil exports that help finance the war.
In Moscow, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that Putin was “open to peace and serious decisions” but opposed to what he described as “temporary respites and subterfuges”.
Reporting from Berlin, Al Jazeera’s Dominic Kane said the outcome of the talks remains unclear.
“We know American emissaries were speaking to Ukrainians here in Berlin yesterday and today. Talks between those two groups have finished, according to a statement by Zelenskyy’s office,” Kane said.
“What we don’t yet know is how much of the US-led 28-point plan – parts of which were acceptable to Moscow but strongly opposed by Kyiv and EU officials – remains intact.”
Kane added that the German government has presented a separate 10-point proposal focused on military and intelligence cooperation rather than a peace settlement. European leaders are expected to continue discussions on the remaining areas of disagreement.
Meanwhile, Ukraine said on Monday that Russia launched 153 drones overnight, with 17 striking their targets.
Russia’s Ministry of Defence said its forces destroyed 130 Ukrainian drones over Russian territory.
Kyiv said its underwater drones struck a Russian submarine docked at the Black Sea port of Novorossiysk. Ukraine has stepped up naval attacks in recent weeks on what it has described as Russia-linked vessels in the Black Sea.
Russian forces have continued to target the Ukrainian port city of Odesa, with two Turkish cargo ships hit in recent days. Kyiv said the strikes were aimed at Russian targets.
Zelenskyy also accused Moscow of using its attacks as leverage in peace negotiations.
He said Russia has struck every power station in Ukraine as part of its campaign against the country’s energy infrastructure.
This week is shaping up to be crucial for the European Union’s policy on Ukraine. EU foreign ministers met in Brussels on Monday; EU heads of state will gather on Thursday. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is meeting United States envoy Steve Witkoff. At the top of the agenda is the peace plan put forward by US President Donald Trump and continuing funding for Ukraine’s war effort.
The European strategy so far has been to alter the US-proposed peace plan in such a way that it becomes completely unacceptable to Russia. This, as European leaders hope, will reinforce the core narrative emanating from their capitals over the past two months – that Russian President Vladimir Putin is just playing games and doesn’t really want peace.
The idea behind it is to try to sway Trump to their side and have him apply additional military and economic pressure on the Kremlin rather than pressing Ukraine into signing an unsavoury peace deal right away. But this effort could easily backfire.
The main practical issue with regards to Ukraine’s capacity to withstand Russian aggression during 2026 is who is going to fund its army as well as its state and social welfare system. Trump proudly states that the US is no longer financing Ukraine’s war effort because, in his parlance, it is “Biden’s war” – ie, his predecessor Joe Biden is to blame.
The burden of funding is now squarely on Europe – the EU and rich non-EU countries, such as the United Kingdom and Norway. The US keeps providing weapons to Ukraine, but these are being paid for with money from European coffers. US intelligence support, crucial in Ukraine’s war planning, is currently available to Kyiv for free.
European leaders have been vocal and aggressive throughout the year in rejecting any realistic compromise that could end the war. But even as 2025 is ending, there is no clarity as to how they are going to back up their jingoistic rhetoric with sufficient funding that would allow Ukraine not just to stay afloat but tip the balance in the conflict in its favour.
Their plan A is what they call the reparations loan. It envisages using the assets of the Russian Central Bank frozen by European banks to fund the Ukrainian defence. This means that rather than spending the money on actual reparations – as in Ukraine’s post-war restoration – it would be spent on the war itself.
The thinking behind this plan is that once Russia suffers a strategic defeat, it would retroactively agree to the confiscation rather than demand its money back, so European governments would not have to reach into their coffers to return the money to the Russians.
The obvious problem here is that exactly nobody – except war cheerleaders who have been promising Russia’s defeat for the past four years – believes this outcome is even remotely realistic. Belgium, which holds the bulk of these assets, is equally sceptical, which is why it opposes this plan. It has been joined by a growing number of EU states, including the Czech Republic and Italy.
The other big problem is that Trump’s peace plan has radically different designs for the assets in question. It envisages using them as actual reparations, as in spending them on restoring Ukraine’s economy. Most crucially, Moscow has on numerous occasions signalled that it agrees with this part of the plan. It considers the money lost and wants to make sure neighbouring Ukraine does not turn into a failed state.
This means that if the reparations loan plan goes ahead, it would undermine the most attractive provision of Trump’s plan. If this happens, the US and the EU may find themselves more at odds with each other than they already are, and that would hardly sway Trump.
His administration has indicated on a number of occasions that it could walk out of the peace process if it is derailed, which means ending any help to Ukraine, be it with weapons or intelligence.
The reparations loan plan also comes with an enormous risk for the European economy. The confiscation of Russian assets would discourage any central bank in the world from keeping its money in Europe, meaning the European banking system stands to lose.
More importantly, this move cannot guarantee that Ukraine would be able to stop Russia’s slow but steady advancement. Securing funding for another year under the current circumstances basically means that more Ukrainian lives and territory will be lost in 2026.
This money cannot in effect counter the biggest threat to Ukraine and its neighbours right now: that of Russia precipitating a humanitarian catastrophe that could spill over into the region by devastating Ukraine’s energy infrastructure this winter. The latest blackout in Odesa when the whole city was left without water and heating in the middle of winter is a dark prelude of things to come.
All this warrants the question of why European leaders are acting the way they are now. Could their irrational radicalism be explained by their extensive political investment in delusional outcomes of this war that they have been selling to voters for the past four years? Or are they engaging in incessant moral posturing so as to avoid being scapegoated for the real outcome of the war?
There is probably a bit of both. But there is perhaps also an even more sinister motive, recently expressed by Wolfgang Ischinger, chairman of the Munich Security Conference: the idea that “as long as this war is being fought, … Europe is safe because the Ukrainians have successfully tied down this mighty Russian army.” In other words, there are some within the European political elite who perceive ending the war as being against European interests.
But regardless of what those on top think or are motivated by, the war fatigue in Europe is real. The rise of pro-Russia far-right groups in Germany and elsewhere, capitalising on the ruling elites’ shining ineptitude in handling the conflict with Russia, is a clear sign of that.
If the reparations loan scheme does not pass this week, the EU would have to go to plan B, which envisages loaning money from the EU budget. That, of course, would be met with fierce opposition from the European public.
The failure to secure funding for Ukraine may be seen as an embarrassing failure in Europe, but it would make things easier for Zelenskyy. With his administration losing popularity amid continuing military upsets and a major corruption scandal, Ukraine’s president is well on his way to becoming the chief scapegoat in this debacle.
But no more funding from Europe would allow him to declare that the West has betrayed Ukraine and proceed with the inevitable: accepting an unsavoury peace largely on Russia’s terms.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.