What could be better than peace? The end of suffering, destruction, and a chance to rebuild. A moment to grieve for the fallen—and to look ahead with hope.
It’s a compelling idea. Unless, of course, the peace is hollow—and one side never intended to stop fighting.
The cost of that shadow war is already mounting. Major airports repeatedly closed by drones. Critical infrastructure under threat. Societal disruptions that defy traditional defense calculations. And yet, if this price has been tallied, it’s been drastically underestimated.
Lose Ukraine, and Western Europe loses its frontline buffer against more precise and relentless Russian aggression. That is why backing Ukraine toward a decisive victory is not only a moral imperative—it’s the rational economic choice.
A quick “peace” deal wouldn’t bring peace. It would saddle NATO with decades of sustained defense spending—likely 4%–5% of GDP—with profound long-term implications for European economies.
Putin won’t last forever, but without regime change, his successor is likely to continue his mission of imperialist expansion and repression. And unlike the Cold War, the new confrontation won’t be orderly or predictable. Today’s threats are diffuse, invisible, and deeply integrated into civilian life: drones, social media campaigns, sabotage, criminal networks, migration flows. This is a fundamentally different kind of conflict.
During the Cold War, the Iron Curtain created a hard, relatively controlled division between NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Even when the USSR supported terrorism abroad, the impact was regional and constrained. Modern shadow warfare penetrates complex societies, exploiting infrastructure vulnerabilities and creating persistent, systemic disruption.
Europe is at a crossroads. It can accept a “peace” that masks ongoing aggression—or it can invest in Ukrainian victory and long-term security. The choice will define the continent’s stability—and the credibility of its democracies—for decades to come.