Death from above, resistance from below, in Ukraine

In the cold, dark early morning of February 23, the Russian military launched the largest drone attack of its war against Ukraine to date, capping off the third year of aggression with a wave of 267 suicide and decoy drones. The skyline over Kyiv lit up as air defense forces fired long bursts at the drones, the sounds of explosions and machine guns mixing with the unmistakable buzz of the Iranian-designed Shaheds. Three people were killed across the country, despite 138 drones reportedly shot down and another 119 brought down by electronic jamming systems. The Russians also fired three ballistic missiles during the attack.

Now with Ukrainians weeks into the fourth straight year of defending themselves against these daily attacks, a new dynamic threat is rapidly developing under the guise of a Trump administration overtly sympathetic to the rightwing Putin regime and quickly moving to undermine Ukraine’s ability to defend itself, all the while claiming they are pushing for “peace.”

The peace of the graveyard is no peace at all, and while the threats facing those in Ukraine fighting for a secure and democratic future predate the proto-fascism advancing in the United States, the scale of recent actions taken by the Trump administration points to a future that will be defined by anything but peace.

For those in Ukraine caught between Russian tanks, Western banks, their own deeply flawed, neoliberal state—in addition to the unfolding abandonment by the United States under Trump—the situation could hardly be more severe.

Despite these challenges, people are continuing to struggle for a better future, often paying with their lives in the process. Though often overlooked by armchair commentators of both the Left and right, that Ukrainians are fighting in defense of their homes and right to self-determination is central to understanding the war. And like those struggling in Palestine, Syria, Sudan, or anywhere else, Ukrainians deserve support from internationalists worldwide.

After three bloody years of full-scale war, the relatively successful defense of Ukraine can be attributed to two broad factors. The first is the motivation, courage, and self-organization of large sections of the population, and the second is the international humanitarian and military assistance that has provided much of the material needed to sustain this defense. Vast networks of volunteers have organized material support for humanitarian needs and under-equipped military units, often with the help of international volunteers.

In the first year of the war, hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians volunteered for military service from all walks of life, but the intensity of modern combat soon began to take its grim toll. The Ukrainian government does not release casualty information consistently, but at least 46,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed, while other estimates range multitudes higher. Hundreds of thousands have been wounded, while tens of thousands of civilians have also been killed or injured.

To replenish casualties and allow exhausted troops rest, the government has engaged in an increasingly draconian system of mobilization, since the most motivated typically already serve. Incidents of abuse and corruption have been documented. Outnumbered by invading Russian forces, most soldiers are expected to serve until the war ends or they are wounded or killed, which is naturally controversial in Ukrainian society.

A bill addressing demobilization was drafted late last year, but has not yet been submitted to the Verkhovna Rada due to concerns about insufficient military reserves. Currently Ukrainian men cannot be forcibly mobilized under the age of 25, in an effort to protect the younger generation amid concerns over long-term demographic trends, but both the Biden and Trump administrations have called for the Ukrainian government to lower the mobilization age to 18. Volodymyr Zelensky has rejected this, arguing the greater need is for advanced equipment: “Please tell me, if a person is standing in front of you without a weapon, what difference does it make if that person is 20 years old or 30? There is no difference.”

Despite the extreme exhaustion and pain felt across Ukrainian society, there is little evidence people are interested in capitulation. A poll from November 2024 indicated that a slight majority of respondents favored a negotiated settlement to the war as quickly as possible, with support for this increasing in areas near the frontlines. A more recent poll conducted by the Economist indicated some shifts in opinion, with a majority reporting that they support fighting Russia even with the loss of U.S. aid. The seemingly contradictory nature of these positions suggests a desire to fend off the Russians, while also grappling with the reality that pushing them out entirely may not be possible within the parameters of the current power imbalance.

Ukraine’s reliance on foreign assistance is its greatest vulnerability. Russia has a larger population to draw troops from and an economy mobilized for war. Despite suffering huge losses in Ukraine, the Russian army outnumbers Ukrainian forces in most sections of the front, and is slowly advancing. While Ukraine has made improvements in strengthening its own military industries, the sheer extent of material consumed by fighting necessitates external assistance.

Though the Biden administration organized the provision of military, economic, and humanitarian assistance, a full accounting of the administration’s own flawed, opportunistic approach is beyond the scope of this article. The administration’s rhetoric upholding international law and condemning Russia’s imperial aggression rang hollow as Washington greenlit the Israeli campaign of extermination in Gaza and beyond after the October 7 attacks.

In the background lurked the spectre of Trump and a far-right MAGA movement, which displayed a growing hostility to Ukraine, with key figures laundering Russian propaganda and repeatedly attempting to block aid in Congress. In a sign of trouble to come, Republicans delayed a vote on critical Ukrainian military aid for six months during the autumn and winter of 2023–24, likely contributing to the loss of the strategic city of Avdiivka and the resulting Russian advance, which has been slowed but still not entirely halted around Pokrovsk.

Now that MAGA has taken control of the U.S. state, this festering hostility is quickly maturing into an open alignment with Putin’s far-right Russia, with each day bringing more bad news for those committed to a Ukraine free of foreign domination. While the recent pace of Trump’s actions can be dizzying to comprehend or follow, they clearly demonstrate the administration’s priorities and point toward a difficult future for Ukraine.

Trump spent 2024 blaming Zelensky and Biden for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Upon taking office he referred to Zelensky as a dictator, while refusing to characterize Putin as one. He and his backers have openly aligned with the far-right Putin ally Viktor Orban of Hungary for years. One of the administration’s first acts was to end funding for USAID, which, for all its problems, has halted life-saving treatment for tuberculosis and HIV/AIDs patients in Ukraine and around the world.

On March 3, following Trump and J. D. Vance’s moronic attacks on Zelensky during a press conference called to announce the surrendering of Ukraine’s natural resources to effective U.S. control two days earlier, all U.S. military assistance to Ukraine was paused indefinitely as punishment for defying Trump’s imperial dictates.

On March 5, the Trump administration paused all intelligence sharing with the Ukrainian government, undercutting the ability of Ukraine to target Russian forces with longer range missiles and to detect incoming Russian air strikes. Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine and Russia, Retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, justified the action by stating the Ukrainians “brought it upon themselves,” and described the cut as “hitting a mule with a two-by-four across the nose, you got their attention.” Kellogg has not stopped at this dehumanization of a population that is fighting in defense of their lives, but has gone out to imply that the Russians, the aggressor, are in fact being more reasonable than the Ukranians.

On March 6, Reuters reported that the Trump administration was considering removing protection for 240,000 Ukrainians as part of stripping the rights of 1.8 million migrants living in the United States under temporary humanitarian parole programs, leaving them eligible for deportation into an active warzone. (This plan was reportedly being considered prior to the March 1 meeting at the White House.)

On March 7, the same day as Russian strikes killed 11 civilians and wounded 47 in Dobropillia, a small town in Donetsk Oblast, Trump told reporters, “I’m finding it more difficult, frankly, to deal with Ukraine. And they don’t have the cards… In terms of getting a final settlement, it may be easier dealing with Russia.”

He then justified the Russian aggression further: “I think he [Putin] wants to get it stopped and settled and I think he’s hitting them harder than he’s been hitting them and I think probably anybody in that position would be doing that right now.”

On March 9, NBC reported that the Trump team was now looking to expand the intensity of its extortion before any resumption of intelligence and military assistance was considered, with the moves to acquire control over Ukraine’s natural resources now not enough to satiate the administration’s appetite.

On March 18, Trump spoke with Putin over the phone to ostensibly discuss the prospects of a 30-day ceasefire that Ukrainian leadership had agreed to on March 11 after a meeting in Saudi Arabia. Following the meeting the Trump administration agreed to resume the delivery of military aid allocated during the Biden administration, while also reportedly resuming intelligence sharing. But by this point, Ukrainian forces fighting in Russia’s Kursk region had been forced into a retreat, losing another component of leverage for future negotiations. While it’s not possible to attribute the Russian breakthrough solely to U.S. actions, the fact remains that Ukrainian forces were largely reliant on U.S. satellite intelligence and long-range missiles for identifying and targeting Russian troop concentrations, both of which were withheld during this critical time. Additionally, the Trump administration has blocked Ukraine from utilizing commercial satellite imagery.

In another gift to Putin, the United States has ended funding for research into the abduction of Ukrainian children by Russian authorities in occupied territories. This is in addition to the ending of a Justice Department initiative started under Biden to track Russian war crimes in Ukraine, reducing efforts to counter Russian sabotage, and pausing offensive cyber actions against Russia, all while key members of the administration consistently frame Zelensky as the obstacle to “peace.”

Following the March 18 phone call with Trump, Putin subsequently issued his own demands for participating in any ceasefire. They include the “complete cessation” of foreign military aid to Ukraine and the demobilization of Ukrainian forces, both of which would critically undermine Ukraine’s ability to defend against further Russian attacks. As the Trump administration disseminated statements declaring Putin had agreed to a 30-day pause of attacks on infrastructure, waves of Russian drones attacked Kyiv and other targets around the country. These attacks have continued.

After the March 18 attack, Trump goon Steve Witkoff, the special envoy to the Middle East, told news media that he believed Putin had issued an order within 10 minutes directing Russian forces not to attack, and that any attack that did occur happened before that order:

“In fact the Russians told me this morning, that seven drones were on their way when President Putin issued his order, and they were shot down by Russian forces, so I tend to believe that President Putin is operating in good faith, he said he was going to be operating in good faith to the president yesterday, and I take him at his word.”

The attacks did in fact occur roughly six hours after the Trump and Putin call had ended, and there is no logical reason why Russia would shoot down its own drones—or evidence it had. Witkoff’s statement, more than displaying unvarnished stupidity, reveals a more concerning dynamic at play. The administration is clearly working to privilege the Russians, rhetorically and materially, over the Ukrainians.

In an interview with Putin fanboy Tucker Carlson, Witkoff doubled down on his ignorance and regurgitated more dangerous Kremlin talking points:

“First of all, I think the largest issue in that conflict are these so-called four regions; Donbas, Crimea, you know the names, Lugansk, and there’s two others. They’re Russian-speaking, there have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule. I think that’s the key issue in the conflict. So that’s the first thing. When that gets settled, and we’re having very, very positive conversations.”

Aside from the fact that Witkoff can not name the regions of Ukraine occupied and at risk of a new illegal Russian annexation—which for the record are Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson oblasts—he pushes the extremely reductive and factually incorrect idea that these regions are inherently and actively pro-Russian because there are many Russian-speaking Ukrainians living here. This is pernicious propaganda, some of the most widely circulated among the campist and the red-brown crowd. That being said, the separatist movement organized and financed by Russian forces, has received some organic support from residents within the proclaimed borders, despite being characterized by authoritarian violence and a reactionary political program.

Crimea is also Ukrainian, despite being taken in 2014 and filled with essentially Russian settlers, a practice that is ongoing within territories taken since 2022, as well. There have been no legitimate referendums that show support for joining Russia. On March 21, Putin decreed that all Ukrainians “illegally” living in areas now occupied by the Russian military have until September to accept Russian citizenship or leave. Putin also has insisted that any negotiations be predicated on Ukraine surrendering the entirety of the four oblasts to Russia. Fighting also remains ongoing in parts of Kharkiv oblast.

The people of Ukraine, however, have shown little interest in accepting any scenario in which Russia is allowed to dominate their lives. An October 2024 poll conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology showed 93 percent of Ukrainians hold negative views of Russia, with only 3 percent expressing a positive opinion. On the eve of the 2022 full-scale invasion, only 50 percent expressed a negative opinion of Russia. The increase in contempt for Russia clearly shows that Russia’s brutal, murderous aggression is not welcomed across Ukrainian society.

The growing alignment between MAGA and Putin’s Russia should be a cause for concern for everyone, not just those defending Ukraine. With the far-right ascendant across Europe, Ukraine’s struggle, despite its many flaws, is one with far-reaching implications. Its abandonment will be a victory for the authoritarian right.

Any negotiations made over the heads of Ukrainians that disregard the legitimate security concerns of the people living here is unlikely to bring any meaningful peace. There is little evidence that Russia seeks anything less than total capitulation, and any efforts by the Trump administration to facilitate that need to be vigorously opposed.

In the meantime, bottom-up efforts are ongoing to support those most in need, soldiers and civilians alike. Groups like Solidarity Collectives, Radical Aid Force, Street Aid Daily, Base Ukraine, Eco Platform, the European Network for Solidarity with Ukraine, and the Ukraine Solidarity Network-US, among others, offer good starting points for getting more involved. Journals like Commons also offer critical insight.

Much can be learned from Ukraine’s struggle, and time is of the essence.

Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see “About Tempest Collective.”

Featured Image credit: Kris Parker; modified by Tempest.