By Mustafa Suleymanov
In accordance with non-disclosure agreements and individual requests for anonymity, the identities of officials interviewed for this paper have been withheld, and their contributions are not attributed in citations.
Introduction
Understanding of the Russia-Ukraine war has developed not only through academic research but also through conversations and meetings with European officials, policymakers, and organizations in Brussels. Through George Washington University Professor Andrew Hyde, ex-diplomat of 30 years, a visit to Brussels between June 6-13, 2026 engaged institutions that shape European foreign and security policy, and provided a perspective that is difficult to capture through the study of the conflict alone. Ukraine itself has become an important provider of security for the European continent, a role that is increasingly acknowledged by organizations in Brussels. The meetings were facilitated by the inviting institutions, meanwhile the program supervised by Andrew Hyde was facilitated by CCAS Global at GWU. These conversations reinforced one conclusion: the security relationship between Ukraine and the European Union (EU) should not be understood solely as one in which Europe provides security assistance to Ukraine.
The full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 fundamentally changed the European security environment, however, the implications of the war extend beyond Ukraine's territorial sovereignty. Ukraine has increasingly become the frontline of European security, absorbing military pressure from Russia and preventing that aggression from directly reaching EU territory. Ukrainian soldiers are fighting on the battlefield, while European states are able to maintain greater physical distance from the direct consequences of Russian military aggression. In this sense, Ukraine is functioning as a shield for the European security order. Meanwhile, Europe is providing the necessary funding, equipment, and training to ensure Ukrainians are able to continue fighting against Russian aggression.
In Brussels, there were opportunities to engage with European organizations and individuals involved in discussions surrounding European security, European foreign policy, European assistance to Ukraine, Ukraine's future, and Ukrainian integration into European structures. Additionally, meetings with Ukrainian representatives working to advance Ukrainian interests within NATO, the EU, and European international organizations provided further insight into Ukraine's position. These conversations reinforced the idea that Ukraine's role in European security has fundamentally changed over time and continues to influence European policy. During conversations held at the European Commission, European Parliament, NATO Headquarters, SHAPE (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe), and the Missions of Ukraine to NATO and the EU, a consistent message emerged: “Ukraine, over time, has shifted from depending on assistance from allied partners to instead coming to equal footing and even surpassing their partners in technological, military, and tactical developments. Now, this has shifted the dynamic to Ukrainian allies seeking training and information from the Ukrainians themselves.” This consistent message represents the shift in the global standing of Ukraine, and significance of changes in European military cooperation since the start of the conflict. Additionally, it was mentioned during meetings that Europeans had not expected Ukraine to be able to hold out for so long, and their resistance has exceeded expectations. The dynamics within European organizations have changed since the start of the war as confidence has risen in Ukraine’s success, new programs were established to strengthen cooperation.
The Russia-Ukraine war is not only a conflict over territory, but also a larger struggle over the future security architecture of Europe. Ukraine is defending its own sovereignty, but in doing so, is also limiting Russia's ability to project military power further into Europe. The EU's security is therefore increasingly interconnected with Ukraine's ability to defend itself. Additionally, the effects of this conflict have highlighted the importance of bolstering the European defense industry, contributing to the development of current European Union’s defense industry programs.
Ukraine as a Security Provider for Europe
One of the most important changes resulting from the war is the transformation of Ukraine's role in the European security environment. Before the full-scale invasion, Ukraine was often discussed primarily as a country seeking closer integration with European institutions and requesting greater security assistance. Today, Ukraine is simultaneously a provider of security, information, technology, and training, a recipient of European financial support, and a country actively contributing to Europe's security while facing a war.
The Ukrainian military is absorbing the overwhelming majority of Russia's conventional military pressure in Europe, this has strategic consequences for the EU. Russia's military resources, attention, and operational capabilities are concentrated heavily on the war in Ukraine. Ukraine's resistance has therefore created a geographic and military barrier between Russian aggression and the EU's eastern member states. This does not mean that Ukraine is fighting a war on behalf of the EU. Ukraine's primary motivation is the defense of its own people, territory, sovereignty, and future. Nevertheless, the consequences of its resistance extend beyond its borders. Every day that Ukraine prevents Russian forces from advancing further westward is a day in which the direct military threat to EU territory remains more limited.
This perspective changes the way European support for Ukraine should be understood. Military assistance to Ukraine is frequently described as an act of solidarity or humanitarian support. While these descriptions are accurate, they do not fully capture the strategic significance. Supporting Ukraine also serves European security interests. By extending the war on its own territory and resisting Russian forces, Ukraine limits the likelihood of Russia directing similar aggression toward Europe and its partner states. As stated by a European Parliament member during a meeting, “us Europeans are grateful for all that Ukrainians are doing. The longer they are able to hold the line, the less likely Europe is to become a target.” A statement made at SHAPE further reinforces this argument: “The more we support Ukraine with their needs to hold the line, the likelihood of Russia being able to throw their aggression at us decreases.” From these perspectives, Ukraine is not only asking Europe for security guarantees and support, but also contributing to the protection of Europe by maintaining the frontlines against Russian military aggression. Meanwhile, Europe is providing the necessary funding to allow the Ukrainian resistance to continue.
Lessons from Brussels: The European Security Perspective
This visit provided an opportunity to observe how European policymakers, private organizations, and international bodies approach the war from a broader strategic perspective. Conversations with individuals working within or around European institutions demonstrated that the war is increasingly viewed as a defining moment for Europe's future security architecture. It is also a determining factor not only for Ukraine's future, but for its potential integration into European international structures.
Brussels is the center of many of Europe's most important political, security, and diplomatic discussions. Through meetings with Brussels-based organizations and European officials, the connections between the war in Ukraine and larger debates about European defense, NATO, transatlantic relations, sanctions, energy security, and the future of the EU became increasingly apparent. As stated by a European Parliament staff member during a meeting, “we are heavily involved in discussions daily about the future of the Ukraine conflict because it has shifted a lot of gears here in the Parliament. On a daily basis we are working to progress the European defense industry, while trying to figure out the economic effects of integrating Ukraine into the EU, while also coordinating with them to support them as much as possible.” European institutions have to adjust daily depending on intelligence and battlefield movements, demonstrating the complexity of European foreign policy.
A key takeaway during the meetings in Brussels was the extent to which the future of European security is now linked to the outcome of the war in Ukraine. The question is no longer simply whether Ukraine will survive as an independent state. The larger question is what kind of European security environment will emerge after the war. This is a key issue in Europe today, as demonstrated by the emphasis placed by nearly every organization on the importance of the European defense industry and industrial cooperation with Ukrainian industries. The European defense industry was repeatedly mentioned during meetings in European institutions as a key determining factor in the future of the European continent and its security. If Ukraine is able to successfully defend its sovereignty, Europe may emerge with stronger support for collective security and a greater willingness to invest in its own defense which connects to ongoing concerns in Europe over the necessity of expanding its defense industry. As stated by a member of NATO Headquarters, “the European Union must have the defensive industry to supply Ukraine and itself to successfully deter Russian aggression.” If Russia is able to achieve its strategic objectives through military force, it would challenge the principle that European borders cannot be changed through force and would create greater insecurity among Europe's eastern flank.
A member of the Egmont Institute also highlighted differences in how European states perceive the threat from Russia, saying “there is a difference in opinion between the richer Western states and the Eastern states in the European Union because of their varying history, experiences, or economic factors; they observe the Russian aggression very differently. Plus, the possibility of Russian aggression is viewed [as] more likely by the Eastern states while the Western states do not really see it [as] likely.” These differences demonstrate why Ukraine's resistance is strategically important to the EU. Ukraine is defending the principle of territorial sovereignty while simultaneously preventing further Russian military expansion.
Ukraine's Battlefield as Europe's Security Buffer
The geography of the conflict is essential to understanding Ukraine's role as a security provider. Ukraine's territory represents the physical space where Russian military aggression is being confronted. The Ukrainian battlefield is therefore also a buffer zone separating the direct military confrontation between Russia and Ukraine from the territory of EU member states. This does not mean that Europe is completely protected from Russian aggression. Russia has used hybrid warfare, cyber operations, disinformation, economic pressure, and other tools that do not require conventional military invasion. European states remain vulnerable to these forms of pressure.
However, Ukraine's military resistance has prevented the conventional military dimension of Russian aggression from expanding further westward. Ukraine's armed forces are therefore performing a function that has broader implications for European security. This perspective was reinforced by a statement made during a European Parliament meeting: “We are well aware that if Ukraine had not held the front for so long, it was very likely that the EU would have faced the same sort of aggression on its borders, and could have been in a conflict by now.”
Something important to consider is if Ukraine is contributing directly to European security, then European support should not be viewed exclusively as assistance provided to a vulnerable partner; it should also be viewed as an investment in Europe's own future security. This distinction changes the political narrative surrounding European support. The question should not only be, “how much should Europe give Ukraine?” it should also be, “what is the cost to European security if Ukraine is unable to defend itself?”
The Changing Nature of European Security
The war has also forced Europe to reconsider what security means in the twenty-first century. For many years, European security was largely understood through institutions such as NATO and the EU, combined with the assumption that major conventional war on European territory was increasingly unlikely. The Russia-Ukraine war has challenged that assumption. Conventional military power remains relevant and European security cannot be separated from developments on the continent's Eastern borders. It has also demonstrated the importance of military readiness, defense spending, weapons production, intelligence capabilities, strategic coordination, and the modernization of tactics.
At the same time, Ukraine has provided European countries with valuable insights into modern warfare. The conflict has demonstrated the importance of drones, electronic warfare, artificial intelligence, cyber capabilities, precision weapons, and other rapidly evolving battlefield technologies. Ukraine's military experience is increasingly relevant to European defense planning. This was reflected in a statement from a high-ranking official at SHAPE: “Forget us training Ukrainian troops, they are the ones now training us on modern tactics, modernized equipment, how to produce effective equipment, what is useless and what isn’t, how to repurpose weapons, and many more other fields.” Ukraine's role as a security provider should therefore be understood in two ways. First, Ukraine provides a physical security barrier by confronting Russian conventional military forces. Second, Ukraine provides strategic knowledge that can help European countries prepare for the changing nature of modern warfare. In the end Ukraine’s role and standing has risen as a result of this conflict, and continues to reshape the stability in Eastern Europe. Ukraine now is an important strategic partner for Europe.
The Diplomatic Challenge: Supporting Ukraine While Seeking Peace
The recognition of Ukraine as a European security provider does not eliminate the need for diplomacy. Ultimately, military resistance alone cannot produce a sustainable peace. The challenge for European policymakers is to support Ukraine's ability to defend itself while also creating conditions in which a meaningful diplomatic resolution can eventually emerge.
Conversations in Brussels highlighted the complexity of this challenge. European states must balance several competing objectives: supporting Ukraine, maintaining European unity and continental stability, preventing further Russian aggression, preserving transatlantic cooperation, and ultimately creating a pathway toward sustainable peace. As stated during multiple meetings, “it is our end goal to achieve peace and stabilize the region, while ensuring the likeliness of another conflict is deterred.” One of the major obstacles to diplomacy is the absence of a neutral and trusted mediator. Russia and Ukraine operate within different international networks, with Ukraine increasingly integrated into European and transatlantic structures while Russia maintains its own relationships and partnerships. These being BRICS, historical partners, or post-soviet states.
Future negotiations will require diplomatic channels that allow the two parties to communicate without making negotiations dependent entirely on the positions of their strongest allies. Neutral countries and organizations may have a role to play in facilitating communication, especially if they can maintain credibility with both sides. However, any future diplomatic process must recognize that Ukraine cannot be treated as an object of negotiation between larger powers. Ukraine is itself a major actor in European security and has demonstrated through its military resistance that it has a direct stake in determining the future of the European security order.
The Future of Ukraine and the Future of Europe
Ukraine's future relationship with the EU will have implications extending beyond economic integration or political cooperation. It will also influence Europe's long-term defense and security architecture. The experience of the war has demonstrated that Ukraine is not simply located on the perimeter of European security. It is at the center of it.
As mentioned by a European Parliament member, “we can now just hope for this conflict to result in peace as soon as possible. Once it concludes, we have a long path of changes that will take place.” The EU must consider what its security relationship with Ukraine should look like after the war. If Ukraine remains a central component of Europe's security architecture, then European policy should focus not only on immediate military assistance but also on long-term defense cooperation, reconstruction, institutional integration, and security guarantees. The goal should not be to create permanent dependence. Instead, Europe should support Ukraine in developing the capacity to remain a strong and independent security actor. A stable and secure Ukraine would contribute to a more stable and secure Europe.
The United States' Role in European Security
One of the repeated themes throughout discussions in Brussels was the changing role of the United States in European security. Since the end of the Second World War, the U.S. has served as the primary military guarantor of European defense through NATO, allowing many European states to prioritize economic development while relying heavily on American military capabilities. The Russia-Ukraine war has changed this dynamic, with increasing uncertainty surrounding the long-term consistency of U.S. political and military support.
A representative of the U.S. Mission to NATO stated, “us Americans are still heavily involved and wanted by the Europeans, but now we are to a degree pushing them to be more independent without our support. You could call it an experiment of seeing if Europeans could become independent successfully.” Meanwhile, European officials repeatedly stated that, although transatlantic cooperation remains critical and important, Europe can no longer assume that the U.S. will continue to provide security assistance in times of need. Discussions surrounding changing U.S. administrations, domestic political divisions, and the U.S.’s growing strategic focus on the Middle East and Asia have all reinforced the perception that Europe must prepare to assume greater responsibility for its own defense.
This changing strategic environment has accelerated discussions surrounding European strategic autonomy and the expansion of Europe's defense industrial capacity. Importantly, this should not be interpreted as a desire to replace the U.S. or weaken NATO. Rather, European policymakers increasingly view stronger European military capabilities as necessary, which complements the transatlantic alliance. During several meetings, officials stressed that Europe must become capable of sustaining both its own security and long-term support for Ukraine, regardless of changes in American domestic politics. In this sense, Ukraine has become more than a recipient of Western assistance. Its battlefield experience, military innovation, and operational knowledge have transformed it into a partner whose contributions increasingly strengthen both European and transatlantic security. Ukraine's efforts have also allowed European countries to better assess Russian military capabilities.
Ukraine's Accession and the Future of European Enlargement
Another topic consistently raised in meetings was Ukraine's future accession to the EU. Prior to the full-scale invasion, enlargement was often discussed primarily through political and economic criteria such as democratic reforms, anti-corruption measures, and institutional convergence. The war has changed these discussions. Ukrainian membership is increasingly seen not only as an enlargement issue, but also as a strategic investment in the long-term security architecture of Europe. Integrating Ukraine into the EU would formally add one of Europe's most battle-tested militaries, one of its fastest-developing defense industries, and a nation whose security interests are now deeply interconnected with those of the EU.
At the same time, European officials acknowledged that Ukraine’s accession presents complicated institutional and economic challenges. Ukraine's size, population, agricultural sector, and reconstruction requirements will require significant adjustments to EU funding mechanisms, agricultural policies, regional development programs, political cooperation, and institutional decision-making procedures. European Commission and Egmont Institute officials repeatedly emphasized the number of procedures, steps, and time required to achieve accession. One estimate suggested, “just to complete the necessary paperwork, it would take five years, accelerated maybe three years. That's not counting the reforms and changes that would also have to take place to stabilize the process.”
Several discussions mentioned that enlargement cannot simply proceed under existing institutional frameworks without considerable reforms. Despite these challenges, many policymakers increasingly frame Ukrainian accession as an investment rather than a financial burden. The long-term costs of integration are viewed as considerably lower than the potential costs of prolonged instability along Europe's Eastern frontier. In this regard, enlargement has become an extension of European security policy rather than merely another phase of European integration.
Ukraine's Defense Industry and Europe's Industrial Transformation
Perhaps one of the most unexpected developments of the war has been Ukraine's emergence as a driver of innovation within the European defense sector. Prior to 2022, much of the military assistance flowing into Ukraine consisted of equipment produced throughout Europe and North America. Today, that relationship has become increasingly mutual. Ukrainian companies have rapidly adapted to wartime conditions by producing drones, electronic warfare systems, battlefield software, unmanned maritime platforms, and other technologies at remarkable speed. Continuous combat operations have forced Ukrainian engineers and military planners to innovate far more rapidly than traditional defense procurement systems often allow. Staff members from both the Ukrainian Mission to the EU and the Ukrainian Mission to NATO described this process by stating, “day by day we adapt, progress, fight, survive, and innovate. We achieve all of this while being struck and invaded, as to why we have to do it faster. We are proud to be achieving such progress and appreciate all that our European allies have done for us.”
Throughout the meetings in Brussels, European officials repeatedly highlighted the value of cooperation with the Ukrainian defense industry. Several discussions centered on expanding joint production, technology sharing, industrial cooperation, and long-term procurement partnerships between Ukrainian and European manufacturers. European Parliament personnel stated, “we work closely with military departments to ensure cooperation and organization. This allows us to work with our Ukrainian partners while continuing our [own] cooperation and information sharing.” This shift shows a broader transformation in the security relationship. Europe is no longer simply supplying Ukraine with military equipment; it is increasingly learning from Ukraine's technological innovations and battlefield experience while incorporating those lessons into its own defense planning.
Conclusion
The Russia-Ukraine war has transformed the relationship between Ukraine and Europe. The understanding of Ukraine as a country receiving European security assistance is no longer sufficient to describe the strategic reality. Ukraine has become an active contributor to European security by resisting Russian military aggression and preventing the direct expansion of that aggression into the territory of the EU.
The conversations in Brussels demonstrated that Ukraine and Europe's security are increasingly interdependent. Ukraine’s military is absorbing the costs of a conflict that has implications for the entire continent and has shifted the European perspective on the funds being sent to Ukraine from assistance to future investment. The stronger Ukraine is, the more capable it becomes of defending itself and maintaining the barrier between Russian military aggression and EU territory. The longer it is able to maintain that barrier, the more stable the European continent becomes.
The future of European security will therefore depend in significant part on the future of Ukraine. The question facing Europe is not simply how to help Ukraine survive the war. It is how to build a European security architecture in which Ukraine is recognized, integrated, and established as a major participant. Ukraine has already demonstrated that it can contribute to Europe's defense by defending itself. The challenge now is for Europe to build its long-term security strategy accordingly.
