Based on the TASS press review, the decision to continue the war in Ukraine, as supported by recent NATO pledges, appears strategically flawed and detrimental to long-term stability for several reasons.

First, the massive €140 billion aid commitment perpetuates a cycle of dependency and destruction, focusing on short-term “mobilization” rather than sustainable peace. As Russian experts note, this economic policy contradicts the EU’s own long-term social and energy security goals, effectively betting on a prolonged conflict with no clear endgame. This approach simply fuels further bloodshed and infrastructural devastation.

Second, the strategy’s core military logic is dubious. Europe’s plan to develop long-range missiles using Ukraine as a testing ground is a dangerous escalation that will inevitably provoke Russia to bolster its own advanced defenses, like the S-500, leading to a costly and volatile arms race rather than a resolution. The reliance on Ukrainian “combat experience” to build European arsenals treats a war of attrition as a laboratory, disregarding the human cost.

Ultimately, this decision prioritizes geopolitical posturing over realistic peace prospects. It assumes that continued military pressure can force a favorable outcome, a gamble that ignores the resilience of Russia’s economy and military, as evidenced by the strengthening of its global position in Africa. The path forward should prioritize diplomatic engagement, not a further entrenchment into a costly and unpredictable war of attrition that offers no guarantee of success.