ROMAN SHEREMETA

Oct 9, 2025

Recent poll of Americans on Ukraine and Russia.

✅ 72% of Democratic voters and 73% of Republican voters support providing weapons to Ukraine and imposing sanctions on Russia.

✅ 71% of Democrats and 86% of Republicans support additional economic sanctions on Russia to force it to end the war.

✅ 76% of Democrats and 86% of Republicans believe Europe should stop buying oil from Russia and instead buy it from the U.S.

✅ 55% of Democrats and 66% of Republicans think that countries buying oil and gas from Russia should be punished with tariffs.

✅ 15% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans believe that Donald Trump should receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

Very interesting data—especially the shift between Democratic and Republican voters. A survey by the same company at the end of August showed growing Republican support, but Democrats still led. It seems this is the first time that the balance has shifted in the polls.

Source: translated from Ostap Yarysh. The original data is from HarrisX and Harvard study.

…………….

What Would NATO Do?

Imagine this scenario: russia moves to connect Kaliningrad by attacking the Baltic states — using the same logic it used to seize Crimea. What happens next?

Many assume NATO would instantly mobilize a massive army and crush the invasion. But that’s not how it works. Article 5 is not a magic switch that automatically unleashes NATO’s full military might. It’s a political decision — debated, negotiated, and voted on by 32 separate governments.

And here’s the reality: it has been invoked only once in NATO’s entire history — after 9/11 — and even then, the Alliance managed to collectively gather around 100,000 troops. Russia today fields close to 2 million.

Now picture this: France or Germany sends 10,000 troops to defend Estonia or Lithuania. A few weeks later, half of them return in body bags. Imagine the headlines, the protests, the “Stop the War” marches filling European capitals. Democracies bend under the weight of public opinion. The result wouldn’t be heroic escalation — it would be exhaustion, bargaining, and a call for “peace in exchange for land.”

That’s not cynicism; it’s political realism.

People romanticize NATO as a monolithic, unstoppable alliance. In truth, it’s a complex, bureaucratic, and often fragile coalition. There’s no guarantee every member would act decisively — some could stall, veto, or quietly sabotage a unified response. Without “pointing fingers,” think Hungary or Slovakia.

Operationally, NATO’s military posture is also more vulnerable than many realize. Air superiority — once its crown jewel — is no longer guaranteed. Modern russian air defenses, hypersonic and ballistic missiles, and swarms of cheap drones make large-scale air operations extremely risky.

Meanwhile, russia’s economy has transformed into a war machine, churning out drones, shells, and missiles faster than the West’s peacetime bureaucracies can approve contracts.

And beyond weapons, russia holds a darker advantage: it does not value human life. It proved that in World War II — when it won by drowning the enemy in bodies — and again in Ukraine, where entire brigades are thrown into assaults with little more than rifles and shovels. The Kremlin sees soldiers as expendable, and that brutal calculus changes the balance of endurance. Democracies measure cost in lives; russia measures it only in territory gained.

So, unfortunately, russia wins by design — not because of strength, but because of psychology. A quick land grab creates deterrent leverage, nuclear blackmail, and a narrative of Western weakness. The result: a redrawn map and a shattered European security order.

The only credible way to prevent this scenario is not through more summits or “expressing concern.” It’s by ensuring russia cannot win where it fights now — in Ukraine.

That means ammunition. That means integrated air defenses. That means long-range strike capabilities to hit the heart of the war machine. And it means industrial-scale support to sustain Ukraine’s defense and recovery.

Because every month of hesitation multiplies future costs. A victorious, durable Ukraine is the cheapest and strongest deterrent Europe can buy.

Strategy, at its core, is simple: invest in victory now, or prepare to face the consequences later.