1/ President Trump’s announcement of Budapest meeting should surprise no one - I am writing this from the Hungarian capital. The war has escalated: the “Tomahawk crisis” had a global echo, Russia has strengthened its local escalation dominance, Ukraine faces its darkest winter
2/ For Trump, Putin, and Orbán, Budapest is a win–win. Trump supports his closest European ally; Orbán hosts a long-awaited “peace summit” after standing alone on the peace track — remember his peace tour last summer — Putin symbolically returns to the EU after 3.5 years of war.
3/ For Kyiv and Brussels, the picture is darker. Ukraine knew the Tomahawks wouldn’t come, and the EU has run out of money — frozen Russian assets are now the only option to keep Ukraine afloat. U.S. military assistance remains indispensable — no substitute for years to come.
4/ The meeting reflects a shift in leverage. Moscow is dictating tempo (of the war) through controlled escalation, Washington is moving diplomacy to Europe’s periphery, and the EU has lost both unity and initiative.
5/ Zelensky is under immense pressure. Russia holds military advantage; Ukraine faces a ballooning budget deficit, fading approval ratings (Zaluzhny, Budanov leading in polls), rising internal insecurity, and unfreezing politics. Budapest 2.0 will not be received well at home.
6/ The real question: will Budapest become another Alaska — a quiet U.S.–Russia understanding and a pre-election stage for Orbán — or will it actually bring the war’s end closer? Either way, the path toward ending the war is drawing nearer, just not on EU’s terms.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ After weeks of fieldwork in Kyiv and Washington, the 9th edition of Essential Ukraine was published today — one of the most complex snapshots of the war so far. Diplomacy is stalled, escalation is accelerating, and the conflict risks entering a new, more dangerous phase.
2/ What began as a debate over Tomahawk missiles has turned into a geopolitical signal — a Missile Crisis 2.0 moment. Washington’s deliberations have shifted from military utility to political leverage, pushing the war toward a strategic threshold.
3/ For months, the U.S. has been providing ISR data for Ukraine’s deep strikes (as @christopherjm reported) — improving its refinery attack campaign, already a quiet policy shift. If Tomahawks are approved, it would mark a step toward a new missile crisis.
1/ Just back from Kyiv, where I talked to dozens of interlocutors. Below are some observations. First, the mood is heavy but steady. One blogger summed it up with a line from an old war movie: the pilot of a burning plane radios in “No panic, we’re fine, we’re falling.”
2/ While it’s a grim joke, Ukraine is holding: the army remains functional, mobilization is strained but ongoing, protests have faded, financing is still available, and politics remain largely under control. For now, Zelensky faces no strategic internal threat.
3/ Internal strains are mounting. The NABU–SBU clash exposes cracks in wartime governance, while Parubiy’s assassination underscores security gaps. Protests revealed frayed state–society ties — yet for now, the war still holds the bond together.
1/ The 7th edition of Essential Ukraine is out. Given its behind paywall, below are the key trends and conclusions.
2/ After a summer of summits, the war has intensified. Ukraine lives in paradox: society longs for an end to the war, yet rejects concessions to Moscow—creating a persistent tension between public sentiment and geopolitical realities.
3/ On the battlefield, Ukraine has contained a Russian breakthrough near Pokrovsk, but Moscow retains the initiative. Continuous attrition, not decisive advances, remains Russia’s chosen strategy.
1/ The assassination of former Rada speaker Andriy Parubiy is the 4th such high-profile killing in Ukraine over the past 2 years. It comes alongside targeted murders in occupied territories and Russia itself—forming a grim pattern of wartime score-settling.
2/ Russia has seen its own string of assassinations since 2022, including propagandists and military figures, while occupied territories are plagued by regular bombings and targeted killings. Ukraine is not immune either—political violence is spreading.
3/ Parubiy’s case is striking. He was deeply linked to the violent chapters of Maidan and Odesa, and pushed divisive identity politics—forcing repeated votes on the education law after the 2019 election defeat. His legacy was polarizing.
1/ Sharing a telling piece on security guarantees – a central issue for Ukraine (and Zelensky) in ending the war. The bottom line: NATO membership is off the table, and no viable Western alternative has emerged.
2/ The talk of European contingents backed by the US – but only after a peace deal – is at best a distraction and at worst an obstruction. It plays directly into Moscow’s core demand and one of the war’s original triggers.
3/ As the article notes, Europe lacks both the military capacity and the political will to take such a step. Still, even discussing it matters symbolically, as part of Europe’s posture.
1/ I’m in Kyiv these days, and here are some impressions on the possible end of the war. Expectations are muted, information scarce, speculation abundant.
2/ The Alaska Summit — Trump’s turn — has not caused a shock in Ukraine beyond political elites, at least not yet. Summer is in full swing, life goes on. “Everyone wants peace,” people say, but the conditions — the details — will matter most.
3/ Most people would welcome an end to the war — but not at the price of major sacrifices such as giving up Donbas. This ambivalence has shaped the public mood for ~1.5 years: war fatigue, but no surrender.