Mortaza Makki, in an interview with the Foreign Relations Strategic Council website, said: “The issue of providing long-range missiles to the Ukrainian government has been raised for over a year, since Joe Biden’s presidency, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has consistently requested European governments to allow the use of long-range missiles to strike economic and military targets deep inside Russian territory. However, the U.S. and Europe were very cautious about fulfilling this request and opposed it.”

He added: “The reason was that the Russians had threatened that if NATO member countries provided Ukraine with long-range weapons capable of striking deep into Russian territory, it would be considered entering a direct battle with Russia. These threats from Putin led European governments to respond cautiously to Zelensky’s request.”

Makki continued: “But with Donald Trump’s return to the White House and the different policy he adopted toward the Ukraine war, the political and military equations in the proxy war between NATO and Russia on Ukrainian soil completely changed.”

The European affairs expert explained that European governments found themselves at a crossroads in confronting Russia: “On one hand, they did not want the Ukraine war to end in Russia’s favor, and on the other hand, Washington’s new conciliatory approach toward Russia left European governments without backing in this battle. Therefore, the Europeans decided to stand against Moscow with broader and more comprehensive support for Ukraine, even without the U.S.”

According to Makki, while Zelensky was humiliated and rejected by Trump, he was welcomed in European capitals.

Analyzing Germany’s shift in policy toward Ukraine, the expert said: “In this changing political and military equation in Ukraine, the German government seriously altered its cautious stance toward Russia in the Ukraine war, rejecting the provision of long-range missiles to Ukraine as a red line, and announced that Germany, in coordination with France and Britain, would permit the use of long-range missiles to strike Russian military and economic centers.”

Regarding the consequences of this decision and its impact on the war equation, Makki said: “This shift in Germany’s position and the growing alignment among the three major European powers—Germany, France, and Britain—on the Ukraine issue will further complicate the war equation. The U.S. also failed to achieve a one-month ceasefire after over three months of negotiations with Moscow, leading Europeans to step up support for Ukraine in the war against Russia with greater optimism and impose new sanctions on Moscow.”

He added: “In reality, Trump’s agenda in dealing with Russia did not yield the expected results, and the Ukraine war continues in an uncertain atmosphere.”

According to the expert, the escalation of battlefield dynamics and Ukraine’s strikes on Russian long-range bombers demonstrated that NATO’s intelligence operations and military aid to Ukraine could achieve unexpected successes in harming Russia. Some even likened these operations to Russia’s Pearl Harbor, which could expand the scope of the Ukraine war.

The European affairs expert concluded: “The dimensions of the ongoing war in Ukraine are unpredictable. European governments consider Russia a serious threat and are building a military alignment along their borders with this country.”

He emphasized: “NATO maneuvers near Russia’s borders, the approval of financial and military aid packages for Ukraine, and increased defense budgets among NATO members are signs of the militarization and securitization of Russia’s borders with NATO countries. Although European governments face serious challenges in achieving internal and Europe-wide consensus on confronting Russia, they strive for unity within Europe to expand and further arm their militaries despite these challenges.”