Expert Briefing: ‘Central Europe at a time of European and transatlantic challenges’

Article by Foreign Policy Centre

July 11, 2025

Download PDF

Expert Briefing: ‘Central Europe at a time of European and transatlantic challenges’

As war, political instability, and democratic erosion continue to reshape Europe’s trajectory, experts recently gathered in Westminster to examine where Central Europe stands and where it may be heading.

On 24th June 2025, the Aston Centre for Europe, the Foreign Policy Centre and UK in a Changing Europe co-hosted a high-level expert roundtable exploring the current political and geopolitical landscape of Central Europe. The event was chaired by the Rt Hon Anneliese Dodds MP and featured speakers from academia, policy, and journalism: Dr. Monika Brusenbauch Meislová, Masaryk University (Czechia); Prof. Aleks Szczerbiak, University of Sussex (Poland); Vladimir Bilčík, Senior Fellow, GLOBSEC (Slovakia); and Alexander Faludy, Journalist (Hungary).

“The geopolitical roles of Czechia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia have always been important but are even more crucial given the war against Ukraine. It is essential that we develop strong people-to-people bilateral relationships, especially to support and promote democracy and security in the face of threats from illiberal actors.”

Rt Hon Anneliese Dodds MP

The panel focused on developments in Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, and Czechia. As war continues in Ukraine and global power dynamics shift, Central Europe has become a frontline for democratic resilience and foreign policy fragmentation. While united in their proximity to the war, the four countries diverge significantly in their internal politics, stance towards Russia, relations with the European Union (EU) and the United States (US), and their approaches to regional cooperation and defence. Included below is a snapshot of the panel’s discussion by country:

Poland faces institutional deadlock following the election of Karol Nawrocki as president. Nawrocki’s predecessor from the Law and Justice party blocked legislative progress by the government under Prime Minister Donald Tusk and more of the same can be expected. However, while judicial reform and domestic governance are stalled, foreign and defense policy remain largely stable. A broad public consensus supports military aid to Ukraine, but Nawrocki has expressed scepticism about its NATO and EU membership ambitions and foresees a more instrumental relationship. UK-Poland defence ties, especially in arms procurement and shared threat assessment, are expected to continue regardless of internal political friction or transatlantic uncertainty.

“Poles have mixed views about Donald Trump, and many are concerned about the possible weakening of the trans-Atlantic alliance, but whatever their views most of them see the US as Poland’s only military security guarantor and are wary of any EU defence identity that is separate from NATO.”

Aleks Szczerbiak, Professor of Politics, University of Sussex

Hungary is entering a politically volatile phase. The ruling Fidesz party is under pressure from the emerging TISZA party. This has prompted Fidesz, variously, to propose and enact a wave of restrictive legislation aimed at entrenching its power ahead of the 2026 elections. These include constitutional changes, media crackdowns and foreign interference laws. Hungary maintains close ties with China, Iran, and Belarus. Orbán‘s government continues to obstruct EU consensus on critical issues such as sanctions on Russia and resists rule of law standards.^[1] The political climate in Hungary is increasingly shaped by shifts in Washington. With President Trump’s administration in the United States taking a more transactional and ambiguous stance toward Europe, Hungary enjoys greater political cover to resist EU pressure.

“Hungary under Orbán is a headache for EU and NATO partners: a country from which Russian intelligence operates with impunity inside Schengen and which issues residents permits and passports to persons associated with those same intelligence services. The concern is multi-dimensional, given security and nuclear energy agreements with China and Iran.”

Alexander Faludy, Journalist

Slovakia has seen moves to roll back democratic norms by the current government, though so far without the same degree of traction as in Hungary. Despite attempts by the government to control criminal investigations and to sideline independent media, public opinion remains broadly pro-EU and pro-NATO, and opposition forces are polling strongly ahead of the next election. Official rhetoric has increasingly challenged Slovakia’s commitments to NATO and EU norms, with Prime Minister Robert Fico raising the prospect of neutrality and distancing the country from Western consensus on Ukraine and Russia.^[2] The country’s trajectory remains uncertain, compounded by the government’s inability to address structural, economic, and social weaknesses. While civic resistance and electoral competition offer space for political change in Slovakia, continued UK and European engagement will be important to support conditions for democratic politics and economic modernisation.

“The current government in Slovakia is Prime Minister Fico’s weakest and most rudderless government so far. While conditions for democratic political change are still prevailing, a future Slovak government will have to address the most daunting social and economic tasks since EU and NATO accessions in 2004.”

Vladimir Bilčík, Senior Fellow, GLOBSEC

Czechia presents a paradox. The country has a firmly pro-Western government, competitive elections, independent judiciary, and a pro-democracy president, yet there is growing electoral volatility ahead of the 2025 parliamentary elections. The ruling coalition is polling poorly amid public frustration over economic hardship, soaring living costs, and housing crisis. In this context, former populist Prime Minister Andrej Babiš is resurging, offering a technocratic, business-first message that sidelines foreign policy and questions Czechia’s continued support for Ukraine^[3]. His return could shift the country toward transactional neutrality, weakening its strong alignment with EU and NATO partners.

“Czechia might look like the diligent pupil on democracy indices, but beneath the surface, there is growing political volatility and disillusionment. A return of Andrej Babiš would not just reshape domestic politics — it could steer Czechia towards a more transactional, inward-looking foreign policy, marked by greater readiness to play both sides.”

Dr. Monika Brusenbauch Meislová, Associate Professor , Masaryk University, Brno

To read the full country analyses and explore key thematic takeaways from this expert discussion, you can download the full briefing here.

^[1] Gabriel Gavin, Politico, ‘Hungary, Slovakia stall new Russia energy sanctions over gas ban proposal’,  June 2025,https://www.politico.eu/article/hungary-slovakia-block-new-russia-energy-sanctions-ukraine-war-invasion-eu-viktor-orban/; International Bar Association, ‘Rule of law: EU blocking €18bn funding to Hungary over legislation concerns’, June 2025, https://www.ibanet.org/Rule-of-law-EU-blocking-18bn-funding-to-Hungary-over-legislation-concerns?utm_source=chatgpt.com

^[2] Jan Lopatka, Reuters, ‘PM Fico says neutrality would benefit NATO member Slovakia’, June 2025, https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/pm-fico-says-neutrality-would-benefit-nato-member-slovakia-2025-06-17/

^[3] Jan Lopatka, Reuters, ‘Czech populist opposition leads as election set for October’, May 2025, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/czech-populist-opposition-leads-election-set-october-2025-05-13/

Topics

Civil Society

Democracy and Elections

Good Governance and Institutional Reform

International Relations and Geopolitics

Rule of Law

Regions

Europe

Central Europe

What’s Behind Trump’s Upending of the Global Economy?

Article by Dr Andrew Gawthorpe

April 3, 2025

What’s Behind Trump’s Upending of the Global Economy?

Yesterday, Donald Trump announced a shift towards protectionism, the likes of which the world has not seen since the Great Depression.

For decades, global prosperity has been underpinned by a system of open trade without parallel in history. That system has enabled the creation of vast wealth in the Western world and lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in the Global South. It has also arguably contributed to global peace, as countries have more to gain by trading than warring with one another.

At a stroke, Trump brought that system to an end. By signing an executive order last night, he imposed a base tariff of 10% on imports from nearly all nations and additional steep levies on many.[1] The United Kingdom faces only the base rate, but many other countries were not so fortunate. For American allies Taiwan and Israel, the rates are 32% and 17% respectively. For the European Union, the rate is 20%.and for China, 54%. For Vietnam and Cambodia – where many international companies moved production in order to avoid becoming victims of a US-China trade war – the rates are 46% and 49% respectively.[2]

Trump’s moves are just the beginning of what will now become a global trade war. Although the Trump administration has suggested that other countries not retaliate, they surely will – leading to an increase in trade barriers which is likely to be catastrophic for the global economy.[3] In the West, consumer goods will become more expensive, interest rates will rise, and jobs will be lost. Elsewhere in the world, economic models which poorer nations were using to lift themselves up will cease to function. Geopolitical instability is likely to follow in the wake of economic instability, as it so often does.

Why is Trump doing it? There are at least three theories, some more persuasive than others. The first holds that this is simply the opening gambit in an epic negotiation, one that will end with most of these tariffs being swept away. The affected countries will come to the table and offer to reshape their trading relationship in a way that is more favourable to the United States, and the world will go back to (more or less) normal.

There are a few problems with this theory. Firstly, what exactly the administration even wants from other countries is not clear. It claims to have based its tariff rate for each country on the mixture of tariff and non-tariff barriers (for instance, subsidies and taxes) that the country in question imposes on the U.S. This is why Trump calls the tariffs “reciprocal”. But if that is the case, then something as simple as VAT would count towards the administration’s calculation. Unless the European Union and other economies are going to abolish VAT, there’s not much they can do to address the administration’s grievance.

The plot thickens when we examine the numbers more closely.[4] The tariff rate the US has imposed on other countries appears not to be based on any plausible mixture of tariffs and non-tariffs barriers. Instead, the calculation seems to be based on that country’s trade deficit with the United States, meaning that only a complete collapse in its exports to the US could satisfy Trump. Only the complete unstitching of the modern global economy could achieve that. Even if it were possible, it implies a world radically different – and poorer – than the one we now inhabit.

Another problem is that the US government lacks the administrative capacity to engage in this many trade negotiations at once. Even the crude back-of-the-envelope way in which its tariff rates have been calculated betray that. Trump’s rambling, incoherent delivery of his speech at the White House yesterday – which badly misstated numerous facts about the economy and economic history – will also do little to inspire confidence amongst either the markets or US trading partners.[5]

A second theory for why Trump is doing this is that he genuinely is seeking a major rebalance of the world economy. He has stated repeatedly that he wants to see a renaissance of manufacturing in the United States, that he believes trade amounts to other countries ripping America off, and that US consumers should be willing to bear some pain in pursuit of economic rebalancing.[6] During his speech yesterday, he once again raised the idea of tariffs becoming a major source of revenue for the US government, implying that they are here to stay.

This theory has plenty of problems too. The economic pain which would be involved in such an adjustment would be catastrophic for the US and global economies, not just a transient period of a little pain. The resultant trade wars could easily get out of control, depressing global economic activity and destroying trust between the United States and its economic partners. There would also be numerous unintended consequences, the type which have bedevilled state economic planners throughout history.

Trump’s idea to fund the US government through tariffs also makes little sense.[7] In his speech yesterday, Trump decried the government’s shift from funding itself through tariffs to doing so through income taxes, a move which occurred in the early twentieth century. But this move was made for a simple reason: tariffs simply cannot generate enough revenue to fund a modern state. Trump’s vision implies a dramatically smaller US state, one that would not be up to the job of containing the geopolitical instability which results from its trade war.

A third theory of Trump’s motives views this whole affair as a power play. By holding a gun to the head of both the American and global economies, he forces everyone to come to him with their cap in their hands. Both foreign countries and domestic industries will have to grovel for relief, and to receive it they will be forced to pledge their allegiance to him. In this view, tariffs aren’t really about economics. They’re about building the structures of a more autocratic state, one based on blackmail and coercion rather than consent and trust.

Already, many countries around the world are debating whether to band together to resist Trump or try to cut their own separate deals. The United Kingdom received a lower tariff rate than the EU, which UK ministers are touting as a success.[8] But trying to negotiate with Trump separately plays into his hands because each country is weaker individually than they would be if they banded together. Such moves are also corrosive of trust between allies and threaten to plunge the world even further into zero-sum thinking.

Which of these three theories best suits events? Given the chaotic nature of policymaking in the Trump administration, there’s likely some truth in all of them. What the administration does next will depend on the reaction of other countries, and of financial markets. By adopting such a maximalist course, Trump has made it more likely that the blowback will be so intense that he will be forced to adjust. But he has also dramatically raised the potential of a global economic catastrophe if he does not.

Andrew Gawthorpe is an expert on US foreign policy and politics at Leiden University and author of the newsletter America Explained. He was formerly a research fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, a teaching fellow at the UK Defence Academy, and a civil servant in the Cabinet Office.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

Photograph courtesy of The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

[1] The White House, ‘Regulating Imports with a Reciprocal Tariff to Rectify Trade Practices that Contribute to Large and Persistent Annual United States Goods Trade Deficits’, April 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/regulating-imports-with-a-reciprocal-tariff-to-rectify-trade-practices-that-contribute-to-large-and-persistent-annual-united-states-goods-trade-deficits/

[2] Kayla Epstein, ‘Trump’s Tariffs on China, EU and more, at a Glance’, BBC News, April 2025, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1jxrnl9xe2o

[3] Daniel Flatley and Annmarie Hordern, ‘Bussent Urges Against Reliation, says ‘Wait and See’ on Talks’, Bloomberg, April 2025, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-02/bessent-urges-against-retaliation-says-wait-and-see-on-talks

[4] Tony Romm, Ana Swanson and Lazaro Gamio, ‘How Are Trump’s Tariff Rates Calculated?’, The New York Times, April 2025, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/02/business/economy/trump-tariff-rates-calculation.html

[5] Daniel Dale, ‘Fact Check: Trump’s False Claims About Tariffs and Trade’, CNN, April 2025, https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/02/politics/fact-check-trump-tariffs-trade/index.html

[6] Jeff Stein and David J. Lynch, ‘Trump Aides Draft Tariff Plans as some Experts Warn of Economic Damage’, The Washington Post, April 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/04/01/trump-tariffs-draft-recession-projection/

[7] Andrew Gawthorpe, ‘On Tariffs, Trump Resurrects 18th Century Economics’, America Explained, November 2024, https://amerex.substack.com/p/on-tariffs-trump-resurrects-18th

[8] Eleni Courea, ‘Why Starmer’s Trade Diplomacy May Still Bear Fruit Despite 10% Tariffs on UK’, BBC News, April 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/apr/02/why-starmers-trade-diplomacy-may-still-bear-fruit-despite-10-tariffs-on-uk

Topics

Regions

United States and Canada

United States

Three years on: Resilience and leadership – John Smith Fellows shaping Ukraine’s future

Article by Fellows at the John Smith Trust

February 28, 2025

Three years on: Resilience and leadership – John Smith Fellows shaping Ukraine’s future

Three years on from Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, John Smith Fellows are focusing on systemic change and are at the forefront of Ukraine’s democratic transformation and recovery.

In 2022, John Smith Fellows were deeply engaged in humanitarian relief – delivering aid to displaced families and coordinating international donations. Today, they are focused on the critical need for long-term solutions.

Fellows now work on legal reform, cultural preservation, emergency response, and community innovation.

Transforming Ukraine through leadership

These efforts are vital for Ukraine’s transformation into a resilient and prosperous democracy, guided by the shared principles of justice, human rights, and equality that underpin democratic world.

Their work not only reflects Ukraine’s commitment to aligning with Western institutions but also highlights the critical role of international collaboration in driving sustainable progress.

Their achievements and projects highlighted in the Fellows profiles below, show how international partnerships can play a vital role in Ukraine’s path towards a better future in NATO and the EU.

Humanitarian Aid and Emergency Response

Oksana Romanukha: Empowering Ukraine’s first responders

As the Ukraine project manager at FIRE AID, Oksana coordinates the delivery of lifesaving firefighting and rescue equipment to the active hostilities zones. Her work directly supports first responders who face immense challenges amid missile strikes, fires, and collapsing buildings.

Why it matters: Emergency services in Ukraine are under overwhelming pressure, with outdated equipment and growing demands due to war-related destruction. Oksana’s efforts are saving lives and maintaining critical infrastructure.

What’s next: Oksana seeks additional international donors and partners to secure more equipment and build the capacity of first responders in the whole war-torn country.

Oksana says: “While Ukraine has surpassed all expectations, we have little to celebrate as the war passes the three years mark. Nobody wants to end this war more than Ukrainians, but we remain determined to end the war on terms that will allow the next generation to live in peace. This will not be possible without continued international support.”

Education and Legal Reform

Artem Shaipov: Shaping the future of Ukraine’s legal system

Artem is at the forefront of Ukraine’s push for European integration in the field of rule of law. As an international development professional, he supports strengthening the rule of law and transforming Ukraine’s legal education system. By aligning it with international and European standards and good practices, Artem aims to empower new generations of legal professionals to uphold democracy and the rule of law.

Artem also works on educating current and future policy professionals so that Ukraine has more people with improved policy implementation skills to address complex development challenges. In collaboration with the Kyiv School of Public Administration, he launched a podcast series, where he and his guests reflect on policy implementation issues in the context of various reforms.

Why it matters: Ukraine’s European integration requires a robust legal framework and legal professionals capable of upholding democracy and ensuring the rule of law. A lack of institutional capacity hampers progress.

Ukraine needs many people capable of implementing system-level changes necessary for Ukraine to withstand Russia’s full-scale war of aggression, recover, and prosper in the future.

What’s next: Artem seeks partnerships with international institutions to enable capacity-building programmes and facilitate experience exchanges. This includes opportunities for learning, and development for policy professionals eager to strengthen their policy implementation skills.

Artem says: “I come from Bakhmut, a once-thriving Ukrainian city that Russia has reduced to ruins and now occupies. I long for the day when my home, along with every other occupied town and village, is freed and rebuilt – a testament to Ukraine’s resilience.”

Human rights and social justice

Nataliia Bolshova: Advocating for the rights of alienated children and parents in Ukraine

Nataliia is a civil rights advocate and a committed member of The Child Has a Right, a national initiative dedicated to addressing the escalating crisis of parental alienation and child abduction in Ukraine. Her advocacy is both professional and deeply personal – despite multiple court rulings in her favor, Nataliia has been unable to see her daughter for over 4.5 years. This is due to systemic inefficiencies, an outdated family law framework, and limited enforcement of court decisions.

Ukraine’s challenges in protecting the rights of children and parents have been further exacerbated by Russia’s full-scale war of aggression, which has created a humanitarian crisis of unprecedented scale. Millions of children have been displaced, and thousands have been illegally deported to Russia. Within Ukraine, the war has disrupted countless families, with 30% of children who fled Ukraine with one parent losing all contact with the other parent, and 80% of children whose parents serve in the Armed Forces experiencing minimal or no communication with them.

Why this matters:
While Russia’s war crimes against Ukrainian children are the root cause of many recent cases of family separation, Ukraine’s family law system is ill-equipped to address the increasing complexities of parental alienation and child abduction. Social services, enforcement agencies, and courts handling family law cases often lack the necessary resources, expertise, and accountability to resolve these issues. This creates a cycle where systemic failures place the burden on alienated children, leading to significant psychological distress. Cases of depression and even suicides among affected children have been documented, underscoring the urgent need for action.

What’s next:
Nataliia is seeking international partnerships and resources to address these critical issues. Her vision includes:

Advocacy for legislative reform: Collaboration with governments and international organisations to support the drafting and enforcement of family law reforms, ensuring that court decisions are not only issued but also effectively implemented.
Training and expertise: Assistance from experts and institutions to design specialised training programmes for Ukrainian social workers, judges, and law enforcement officials, equipping them with the tools to handle cases of parental alienation empathetically and effectively.
Support programmes for families: Collaboration with donors and organisations like UNICEF, Eurochild, and the Family Rights Group (UK) to establish comprehensive support systems. These initiatives would include psychological rehabilitation centers for affected children and parents, public awareness campaigns, and legal advocacy programmes.

Nataliia says: “Three years into Russia’s full-scale war, millions of Ukrainian children have been displaced, thousands abducted, and countless more lost in a broken system. While international attention has rightly focused on Russia’s war crimes against children, another crisis is unfolding: the systemic failures that separate Ukrainian children from their parents, leaving them vulnerable to long-term psychological and social consequences.

Protecting children’s rights must be central to Ukraine’s recovery, not an afterthought. The war will end, but without urgent reform, its consequences will last for generations.

My mission is clear: to ensure that children’s rights are protected, families are reunited, and systemic reforms create a lasting impact for future generations.”

Community development and innovation

Vadim Georgienko: Empowering communities through citizen-led solutions
Vadim, co-founder of the Smart Interactions initiative, is revolutionising local governance and community development with the innovative Citizen Token System (CTS). This groundbreaking mechanism empowers citizens to actively participate in decision-making and resource allocation by introducing governance tokens as a tool for transparency and engagement.

CTS has already been successfully piloted in four Ukrainian regions, demonstrating its ability to deliver measurable benefits. By rewarding citizen involvement, the system ensures up to 17.5 times greater social impact compared to traditional methods of humanitarian assistance and economic development. This approach bridges gaps in financial inclusion, strengthens local governance, and fosters trust within communities.

Why it matters: CTS offers a scalable, effective solution for empowering communities, addressing poverty, and improving governance, especially in challenging and rapidly changing environments. By putting citizens at the center, it creates a new standard for participatory governance.

What’s next: Vadim and his team are seeking partners to develop advanced digital tools for CTS and expand its reach across Ukraine and beyond. With your support, CTS can transform how communities in Ukraine and worldwide approach resilience, development, and inclusion.

Vadim says: “The future of Ukraine is interconnected with the future of the democratic world. Now, democracy faces a big problem globally. Why did “traditional” programs to support democracy fail? Without a good analysis of the reasons, I’m not sure that using “traditional” approaches will be successful anymore. On the other hand, I have doubts that respected designers of traditional programmes are able to get out of their habitual bubbles. The world changes rapidly, and rethinking the democratic strategy became a global challenge just yesterday.”

Diplomacy and advocacy

Serhii Orlov: Countering disinformation and strengthening Ukraine’s voice in Central Asia

As a diplomat based in Tajikistan, Serhii is at the forefront of combating Russian propaganda in Central Asia, a region deeply influenced by Kremlin narratives. In his role as counsellor at the Embassy of Ukraine, Serhii leads efforts to counter disinformation, foster bilateral relations between Ukraine and Tajikistan, and amplify Ukraine’s voice in a region often seen as neutral in Russia’s ongoing full-scale war of aggression in Ukraine.

Serhii’s work goes beyond traditional diplomacy. He collaborates with local media and international partners to deliver truthful narratives and expose the manipulation of information that undermines democratic values. By supporting independent journalism and leveraging innovative media strategies, such as Telegram groups and widely consumed social media platforms, he ensures Ukraine’s perspective reaches broader audiences, particularly in regions vulnerable to disinformation.

Why it matters: Disinformation is one of the most insidious weapons in Russia’s arsenal, destabilising democracies and manipulating public opinion. Central Asia, with its strategic importance and proximity to Russia, is a critical battleground in the fight for truthful narratives. Serhii’s initiatives address this challenge by empowering local media and creating sustainable platforms for unbiased information, ensuring Ukraine’s story is told authentically.

What’s next: Serhii emphasizes the urgent need for more targeted and proactive strategies in collaboration with Ukraine’s Western and Eastern partners. Current approaches, while well-intentioned, often fail to account for the complexities of local dynamics, leading to resources unintentionally benefiting pro-Russian entities. To counter this, Serhii advocates for direct support of objective media projects, innovative outreach strategies, and enhanced funding for platforms that combat disinformation effectively.

By strengthening alliances and fostering local resilience, Serhii’s vision extends beyond Ukraine’s immediate needs – he sees this as part of a global effort to defend democracy, reduce corruption, and promote transparency.

Serhii says: “Impunity always evokes even greater evil. The civilized world must realize that neither a divided Ukraine nor its full conquest will satisfy the aggressor’s appetite. All the states that confront dictatorships now, as well as ‘neutral’ countries will become targets of hybrid warfare: election interference, support for radical political movements, energy disruptions, stolen databases, assassinations, and sabotage. That’s why we must act together to stop Russia, ensuring its demilitarization and preventing it from threatening global security again.”

Andriy Shevchenko: Uniting the global Ukrainian diaspora against Russian aggression

As head of mission in Ukraine for the Ukrainian World Congress (UWC), Andriy is mobilising the 25-million-strong global Ukrainian diaspora to support Ukraine in its fight against Russia’s full-scale war. Through international advocacy, humanitarian initiatives, and cultural diplomacy, Andriy works to strengthen Ukraine’s resilience and amplify its voice on the world stage.

The UWC, recognized by the UN Economic and Social Council, unites over 100 organisations in nearly 50 countries to support Ukraine’s defenders, advance its Euro-integration, rebuild communities, and promote democratic transformation. Under Andriy’s leadership, the UWC is driving efforts to defend Ukraine’s sovereignty and support its recovery.

Why it matters: The war has demonstrated the critical importance of global solidarity in defending freedom and democratic values.

What’s next: To learn more about UWC’s initiatives, explore ongoing projects, or discover ways to contribute, visit Ukrainian World Congress.

Education and integration for displaced communities

Elena Frantskevych: Transforming lives through education and integration

Elena is a co-founder of Perlyna, a non-profit center in Riga, Latvia, dedicated to supporting over 100 Ukrainian refugee children daily. The center plays a vital role in ensuring the well-being, education, and integration of children who have faced displacement due to the war in Ukraine.

Why it matters: Elena and Perlyna co-founder Anna address critical challenges for displaced children and their families, including the following:

Education: Assisting children in continuing their studies in both Ukrainian and Latvian curricula, preserving their academic progress and connection to Ukraine.
Mental health: Providing psychological support to help children and their parents overcome trauma and stress caused by war.
Cultural integration: Organising art, music, and sports events to help children integrate into their new communities while maintaining their Ukrainian identity.

The challenge: The center faces significant obstacles, including inconsistent funding and bureaucratic hurdles in securing grants. These issues limit its ability to sustain and expand its essential programs.

What’s next: Elena is seeking partnerships with international organisations, including UNICEF and the European Union Children’s Participation Platform, to secure consistent funding and expand the center’s reach. Additional support from corporate sponsors and charitable foundations can help provide meals, educational resources, and recreational opportunities for children.

Elena says: “Children in war-torn Ukraine face unimaginable vulnerability, with their safety, education, and well-being at constant risk. As the future of the nation, they must be cherished and loved to ensure a better tomorrow. It’s our moral duty to support refugee children, providing the care, protection, and opportunities they desperately need to rebuild their lives and secure a brighter future.”

Arts, culture and storytelling

Olga Reka: Preserving Ukraine’s cultural identity

Through her creative projects, Olga ensures that Ukraine’s cultural narrative is both preserved and reimagined for a global audience. Her recent project, Ukraine and Ukrainians, is a contemporary reissue of Ivan Honchar’s legendary historical-ethnographic art album, brought to life through a collaboration between the Ivan Honchar Museum and Gunia Project, with support from USAID. This edition revisits and expands upon the original work by spotlighting the regions and communities of Ukraine deeply affected by the World Wars, 20th-century technological disasters, and Russia’s ongoing full-scale war of aggression.

Olga’s projects not only document Ukraine’s rich cultural history but also offer a powerful testament to resilience, creativity, and hope in the face of adversity, inspiring global audiences to stand with Ukraine.

Why it matters: Cultural preservation is a cornerstone of Ukraine’s identity and resistance. Olga’s work bridges past and present, offering stories that underscore the strength of the Ukrainian people amidst unimaginable challenges.

What’s next: Olga is seeking funding to further expand her cultural initiatives and to collaborate with international publishers and co-producers, amplifying Ukraine’s voice and cultural heritage on the global stage.

Olga says: “The current war has many dimensions; in addition to the events on the battlefield, it has brought about constant terror from the skies, an information war, and a dramatic reduction in opportunities for entrepreneurship and creativity. However, living through this catastrophe has taught us to adapt and refocus in our search for ideas and models of working.”

Varvara Mishyna: Building bridges through theatre

Varvara Mishyna, the CEO of a cross-cultural theatre initiative, uses storytelling as a tool to connect Ukrainian and international audiences. Her performances in Scotland not only bring Ukrainian culture to new communities but also foster understanding and solidarity during one of Ukraine’s darkest times.

Why it matters: Art and culture play a pivotal role in uniting communities and sharing Ukraine’s message with the world. Varvara’s theatre provides a platform for dialogue and empathy.

What’s next: Varvara seeks collaborations with cultural organisations, venues, and donors to expand her initiative’s reach and impact.

Vavara says: “Theatre has become a bridge between cultures, preserving Ukrainian identity and resilience in times of war. Art cannot stop a war, but it ensures that Ukraine’s voice is heard, its culture remains vibrant, and its stories of strength and survival reach the world.”

Transforming Ukraine together

These are just some of the stories of Ukrainian John Smith Fellows which showcase their remarkable resilience, talent, and dedication. Their efforts are essential to Ukraine’s survival, recovery, and transformation, as well as to strengthening the global democratic community. These Fellows represent a new generation of leaders ready to collaborate with international partners and drive meaningful change.

How you can help:

Collaborate: Offer expertise or create joint initiatives to scale their impact.
Advocate: Share their stories with your networks to amplify their voices.
Donate: Support specific projects through direct funding or by partnering with the John Smith Trust.

For further details or to connect with any John Smith Fellows, please contact admin@johnsmithtrust.org.

Together, we can support Ukraine in its journey towards recovery and democracy, reinforcing our shared values and strengthening the global democratic community as we work for fairer, more sustainable and inclusive societies.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the individual authors and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

Topics

Ukraine Conflict

Regions

Ukraine

Three years on: How the power of networking can contribute to a peaceful and democratic future

Article by Maija Paasiaro

When Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine our immediate priority was to support Ukrainian John Smith Fellows in our network. This included amplifying their humanitarian work, showing solidarity and sharing reliable information from the ground.^[1] Our current and former staff and trustees also leveraged their UK networks to mobilise aid, in-kind donations and helped Fellows and their families to find refuge in the UK.

In the longer term, we have had to rethink how we work. The Trust was established in the 1990s to help emerging leaders in the former Soviet Union navigate an anticipated democratic transition. Thirty years on, the context is very different. Democracy is facing a crisis of trust. Authoritarianism and populism are on the rise. Our world is increasingly fragmented and polarised. We are all facing similar challenges and will be better equipped to tackle them if we work together, listening and learning from each other.

Being a small, independent organisation has allowed us to be agile and responsive. Our strength lies in our networks, built through 30 years of running fellowship programmes for exceptional young leaders from Eastern Europe, Russia, the South Caucasus and Central Asia. Staying connected with them gives us the insights we need to develop responsive programmes.

As our Ukrainian Fellows’ focus has evolved over the last three years from immediate humanitarian response to long-term transformation, institutional reforms and sustainable development, so too has our programming as we now focus on supporting the capable leaders within Ukraine who are looking for international partners to help drive change. At the same time, we recognise that Ukrainians have a wealth of expertise – from cyber threats to digital transformation and crisis management to civic activism – that can offer valuable learning for counterparts in the UK and elsewhere.

Through our Ukrainian Women’s Leadership Programme, in partnership with the University of Edinburgh Business School, and through our current Scotland-Ukraine Reconstruction and Recovery Leadership Programme, our focus is on fostering collaborative connections between counterparts in both countries.^[2] By developing and sharing expertise together, we can help ensure Ukraine’s reconstruction and recovery is sustainable, fair and inclusive.

As we’ve heard time and time again from our network, “Ukraine’s fight has become everyone’s fight” – and that includes the Russian and Belarusian professionals who have been part of our recent leaders in exile programmes.^[3] Unlike other organisations who have opted to exclude all Russians and Belarusians, as aggressor-state passport holders, from their programmes, we have taken a more nuanced approach: we have developed a separate strand of programming for those exiled leaders who are actively working towards an alternative, peaceful and free future for their countries. We think it is more important than ever to engage with Russians and Belarusians who oppose the war and are committed to a peaceful and democratic future for their countries. Not doing so increases Putin and Lukashenka’s power to silence people opposed to their regimes. These programmes support Fellows to develop the insights and skills needed to build the kinds of societies they want to live in in the future. This includes working on shifts needed to break away from authoritarian, imperialistic and patriarchal mindsets.

After everything that Ukrainians have gone through these last three years, they deserve nothing less than a just peace. In the long term, such a peace will only be sustainable if there are leaders on all sides who are willing to listen and learn from each other, who have the skills to debate and disagree with each other respectfully, who can hold difficult conversations about the past and who are motivated and inspired to imagine alternative ways of doing things. The Trust has a history of facilitating discussions and fostering collaborations with people who sometimes have very different backgrounds and points of view. Through our programmes we are creating connections and hope for a brighter future.

Maija has been the Executive Director of the John Smith Trust since 2020. As Executive Director, Maija is responsible for the overall strategic direction of the John Smith Trust. Maija has been with the John Smith Trust since 2017, first as Director of the Central Asia Fellowship Programme and then as Director of Programmes with added responsibility for the Wider Europe Fellowship Programme. Prior to this, she worked for the UK’s leading international conflict prevention and peacebuilding organisation, focusing on governance, peacebuilding processes, security and civil society sector development. Maija has over 20 years of experience in research, analysis and programme development in complex environments, including working in Russia, Kyrgyzstan and Mongolia in education, media and organisational development. She speaks multiple languages and has an MA in Modern History and Russian from the University of St Andrews and an MSc in Development Studies with special reference to Central Asia from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the individual authors and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

^[1] John Smith Trust, ‘Ukraine: what our Fellows are doing and how you can help’, 24 May 2022, https://johnsmithtrust.org/ukraine-what-our-fellows-are-doing-and-how-you-can-help/; John Smith Trust, ‘Fellows in Ukraine fight hard for freedom and democracy’, 18 March 2022, https://johnsmithtrust.org/fellows-in-ukraine-fight-hard-for-freedom-and-democracy/; and, John Smith Trust, ‘Ukraine: efforts to tackle the war’s devastating environmental impact’, 17 June 2022, https://johnsmithtrust.org/ukraine-efforts-to-tackle-the-wars-devastating-environmental-impact/

^[2] John Smith Trust, ‘Launch of new leadership programme for Ukrainian women in UK’, 08 March 2024, https://johnsmithtrust.org/launch-of-new-leadership-programme-for-ukrainian-women-in-uk/; and, John Smith Trust, ‘Ukraine Recovery and Reconstruction Leadership Programme’, 2025, https://johnsmithtrust.org/applications/fellowships-2024-5/ukraine-recovery-and-reconstrustion-leadership-programme/

^[3] John Smith Trust, ‘Leaders in Exile: ‘Future of Belarus’ Fellowship’, 2024, https://johnsmithtrust.org/applications/belarus/.

Topics

Ukraine Conflict

Regions

Ukraine

Three years on: What peace should be

Article by Ostap Kryvdyk

February 27, 2025

The call between President Trump and President Putin on 12 February 2025, left millions of Ukrainians in a state of silent disbelief, shock, and even grief. Along with the comments of US Secretary of Defense Hegseth at the Ukraine Defense Contact Group the same day, it gives us a rather clear frame for the future negotiations, which will define the destiny of Ukraine, Europe – and the whole world.^[1]

Let me stress the conceptual faults of the intended outcome called ‘peace’. So what does peace really mean and what is missing in a contemporary high level discussion about it?

Peace is when war does not happen again. But the reasons for the Russian-Ukrainian war have not been resolved. Putin did not reverse his vision of the Russian world. Russia did not recognise Ukraine’s right to exist and to join NATO. Crimea and part of Donbas are not given back, and the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions are not excluded from the Russian constitution.

Europe cannot deter Russia alone

There is no power balance. The USA is openly declaring that it is leaving European security to the Europeans, denying help to Ukraine to secure its future. NATO membership for Ukraine or any NATO commitment is not happening: no one is risking war to defend Ukraine. Conversely, getting a ‘neutral’ Ukraine fully ready – with massive anti-ballistic missile defense, long-range strike capability, matching air force and fleet, and artillery power – is not on the table either.

Europe cannot deter Russia alone, neither by nuclear, conventional, or hybrid means. Regional powers like the UK or France will not tackle emboldened Russia strengthened by the global network of allies. And prosperity without security – Ukraine’s potential EU membership in the coming decade – is not going to bring investment, development, and reconstruction, because war will come again.

Putin gets ‘neutral’ Ukraine with no security guarantees and shuts us out of NATO. He achieved all his war aims but the change of regime in Kyiv and full control over the rest of the Ukrainian territory (this can wait a bit, and be delivered either through political warfare or during his next stage of aggression).

Democracy and human rights are becoming irrelevant

Peace is when there is justice and dignity. But instead of this the perpetrator is being equalised with the victim in intent, actions, consequences – and moral posture. The aggressor is to be rewarded. International law, along with the values of sovereignty, democracy and human rights are being made irrelevant.

Evidence of genocidal intent is ongoing – Crimean Tatar and Ukrainian identity is being erased in the occupied territories. Rape and mass murders stay unpunished, and arrests and tortures continue as we read this text. Mass mobilisation in the occupied territories is ongoing, and these Ukrainians will be killed in battles against their own.

Irresponsibility for war crimes – be it mass murders, replacement of population, deeming civilians as ‘cannon fodder’, use of chemical weapons, weaponization of frost and hunger – will solidify them as legitimate and efficient means of war.

Denying Ukraine EU membership will be next

Peace is when there is freedom. Ukraine’s war for independence is being devalued into ‘something that should never have happened’. Its heroes will become victims. Those remembering our victories might be labelled radicals, nationalists and war-mongers.

Future elections in Ukraine may become an opposite of itself: an orgy of psychological warfare, toxic social networks and political AI manipulations, massive Russian interference, including terror unconstrained by any moral or legal rules. Much cheaper, much more deniable, and extremely efficient.

Putin continues to deny Ukraine’s access to NATO. The predator will not release its prey.

Is the USA really backing Russia?

Peace should be sustainable. This current framing of peace is not. Setting the precedent of the legalised partitioning of Ukraine will next invite the redrawing of borders in Africa, Latin America, Asia – and in Europe. The example of nuclear disarmament of Ukraine will set the precedent for generations; anything short of nuclear weapons in stock will invite aggression.

Sacrificing Ukraine for avoiding nuclear conflict and for stopping active combat will simply delay the next act. All of this is prolonging Russia’s agony for the next wars to come, instead of finishing the collapse of the USSR and Russian empire. Is the West, and specifically the USA, backing Russia again?

President Trump potentially standing in Moscow next to Putin for his own “victory-against-Ukraine” parade on 9 May is not peace. It looks like the new ‘Yalta accords’, discussing Ukraine’s forced submission and disengagement rules in a Russia-created reality – and the next war coming very soon.^[2]

Ostap Kryvdyk is the Chair of the Ukrainian Strategic Initiative for the Kyiv Mohyla Academy, Ukraine and is also a Fellow for the John Smith Trust.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the individual authors and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

^[1] Pete Hegseth, ‘’Opening Remarks by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth at Ukraine Defense Contact Group (As Delivered)’, US Department of Defense, 12 February 2025, https://www.defense.gov/News/Speeches/Speech/Article/4064113/opening-remarks-by-secretary-of-defense-pete-hegseth-at-ukraine-defense-contact/

^[2] Department of State, United States of America, ‘The Yalta Conference, 1945’, Office of the Historian, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1937-1945/yalta-conf

Topics

Ukraine Conflict

Three years on: What kind of peace?

Article by Andra-Lucia Martinescu

At a recent protest, when asked about the kind of peace he was clamouring for, a participant hesitated briefly before responding emphatically: ‘a peace to end all wars, a peace that would allow us to focus solely on our country, neither in the East nor the West.’[1]

He was referring to Romania, echoing a narrative that grew increasingly potent during the country’s fraught elections after seeding on the fringes of public discourse. Peace may indeed be a universal aspiration. However, when that aspiration is deliberately manipulated to weaken solidarity with those fighting for their sovereignty and existence, peace becomes a weapon wielded in the darkness – isolating the victim while protecting the aggressor.

The strategy lies in distortion by severing the meaning of peace from its context – detaching it from justice and reality so that, when unmoored from the truth, peace becomes a tool of subjugation. Carefully curated to sow fear and distrust, slogans that once lurked in the shadows of conspiracy forums found their way into collective mindsets, nurtured and methodically amplified by hostile external forces.

When Russia invaded Ukraine three years ago, Romanians mobilised across the country to offer unwavering support to the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees crossing the borders – the devastating reality of war and displacement, undeniable in its raw immediacy. Solidarity emerged organically and from the grassroots, with families opening their homes and volunteers mustering supplies, each contributing with resolve to a nationwide relief effort. As the war continued to rage just across the border, it was precisely this solidarity that became a target, not just in Romania but throughout Europe and the system of alliances binding democratic communities in what had seemed, not so long ago, a robust pact. Purposefully, the seeds of doubt were planted in familiar soil to incite historical anxieties, institutional mistrust, and the economic insecurities that war inevitably inflamed.

While fragments of Russian drones kept falling from the sky – a reminder that borders do not confine wars – and news showed Ukrainian cities turned to rubble, another campaign, cloaked in the language of patriotism, was being waged surreptitiously from the depths of social media. Flowing unabated through the digital landscape, shifting between geographies, these targeted influence operations adapted seamlessly, infiltrating local contexts from Bucharest to Bratislava and Berlin while serving a discernible objective: to fracture democratic societies from within and undermine the very foundations of Western coalitions that stood resilient against Russian aggression. Both online and offline, a perilous symbiosis emerged between extremist factions, the Kremlin’s siloviki,[2] and tyrannical/authoritarian regimes opportunistically aligned with this vast destabilisation agenda.

Meanwhile, in Saudi Arabia, talks of a potential peace were held behind closed doors, ostensibly to expedite an agreement,[3] but deliberately excluding its most essential stakeholders, Ukraine and Europe. In the relentless hybrid warfare of today, narratives have become battlegrounds manipulated with algorithmic precision. While the promise of peace remains alluring for many, there is still hope that its meaning can be reclaimed. At this crucial juncture, a collective effort to defend peace as more than the absence of war is imperative.

Peace cannot be brokered in exclusion, nor can it emerge from capitulation to violent revisionism. It is forged through solidarity, protected by justice, and sustained by the unwavering belief that freedom is indivisible.

Andra-Lucia Martinescu is a Foreign Policy Centre Research Fellow.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the individual authors and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

[1] Conversation with a supporter of the far-right during a protest in Bucharest (10.01.2025).

[2] The term is associated with Russian security and military personnel.

[3] ‘Paul Kirby, ’Who was at the table at US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia’, BBC, 18 February 2025, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c743jl8k4kko.

Topics

International Relations and Geopolitics

Ukraine Conflict

Regions

Ukraine

Three years on: Russia’s War on Ukraine’s Forcibly Displaced Children

Article by Jen Ang

February 26, 2025

Three years on: Russia’s War on Ukraine’s Forcibly Displaced Children

Every war is a war against children. However, in its war in Ukraine, the Russian Government has specifically targeted children as a tool to disrupt Ukrainian communities, and secure long-term dominance in the region – pursuing a cruel and systematic policy of forcibly separating tens of thousands of Ukrainian children from their families and deporting them to Russia or Belarus.^[1]

As of 19 February 2025, Children of War reports that 19,546 children have been forcibly deported in this manner, and only 388 returned to Ukraine, while 596 are known to have died. According to the National Police of Ukraine, 2057 are still missing.^[2]

Some children have been placed in Russian foster and adoptive families and given Russian nationality. More than 6,000 have been transferred to “filtration” and “re-education camps” where they are interrogated, and later, “integrated” and receive a “patriotic education.”^[3]

International human rights law (IHRL) does protect children in conflict. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989, which both Russia (1990) and Ukraine (1991) have ratified, as well as the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 (ECHR), for example, prohibit the forcible separation and displacement of children.^[4] The fact that Russia ceased to be party to the ECHR in September 2022, six months after its exclusion from the Council of Europe, is perhaps a reminder, however, of the limited reach of IHRL in conflict situations.^[5]

International humanitarian law (IHL) also recognises children as particularly vulnerable during conflict. Under Geneva Convention IV, and Additional Protocol 1, they are recognised as “protected persons” who should be respected, protected and cared for.^[6] The Geneva Conventions prohibit forcible deportation of civilians, including children; and where evacuation is necessary, protect family unity, require state parties to identify and register separated children, and closely regulate the evacuation of children to other states.^[7] Crucially, changing the personal or family status, including nationality or civil status, of children of war is prohibited.^[8]

Finally, Russia’s program of child deportation may also constitute a war crime. On 17 March 2023, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Russian Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights, who it holds to be allegedly responsible for the “war crimes of unlawful deportation and transfer of [children] from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation.”^[9]

So, what does this mean for the future, and specifically, for the protection, return, and reintegration of the tens of thousands of Ukrainian children who have been victims of Russia’s cynical program of “renationalisation”?

It is clear that progress in rectifying these violations has been painfully slow and despite the strong prohibitions in IHRL and IHL, as well as in the intervention of the ICC, there is at present, no real prospect of change on the horizon for Ukrainian children who have been systematically abducted by the Russian state – at least not until peace is negotiated in the region.

On that day, let us hope that the fate of Ukraine’s missing children is brought to the fore of the negotiations between the state parties, and their return, reunification with their families and reintegration into Ukrainian society is prioritised. They are, after all, an important part of Ukraine’s history of this conflict and to its future.

Jen Ang is Founding Director of Lawmanity, a project that aims to tackle inequalities in the law by working with people-led movements to secure positive change. She is an experienced human rights lawyer and activist, qualified to practice in Scotland, England and Wales, and New York State. She is a legal expert on immigration and asylum, violence against women and girls, children’s rights, and on the rights of survivors of torture and trafficking. She is also a Professor in Practice at the University of Glasgow, and believes in making legal education open and accessible to all.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

^[1] Maria Margarita Mentzelopoulou, ‘Russia’s war on Ukraine: Forcibly displaced Ukrainian children’, European Parliamentary Research Service: Brussels, February 2025, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2023/747093/EPRS_BRI(2023)747093_EN.pdf

^[2] National Information Bureau of Ukraine Children of War, 2025, https://childrenofwar.gov.ua/en, Accessed on 19 February 2025.

^[3] Yale School of Public Health researchers identified 43 facilities in Russia responsible for systematically re-educating at least 6,000 children, but this is considered to be a conservative estimate. See further, Khoshnood, Kaveh, Nathaniel A. Raymond and Caitlin N. Howarth et al., ‘Russia’s Systematic Program for the Re-education and Adoption of Ukraine’s Children’, Humanitarian Research Lab at Yale School of Public Health: New Haven, 14 February 2023, https://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/humanitarian-research-lab-yale-school-public-health-russias-systematic-program-re-education-adoption-ukraines-children-enruuk

^[4] OHCHR, UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies database, Accessed on 19 February 2025, https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/Treaty.aspx?Treaty=CRC&Lang=en

^[5] Council of Europe, ‘Russia ceases to be a party to the European Convention on Human Rights on 16 September 2022’, 23 March 2022, https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/russia-ceases-to-be-a-party-to-the-european-convention-of-human-rights-on-16-september-2022

^[6] Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocol 1, Article 77, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-77

^[7] Geneva Convention IV, Article 49, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-49

^[8] Geneva Convention IV, Article 50, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-50

^[9] International Criminal Court, ‘Situation in Ukraine: ICC judges issue arrest warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova’, 17 March 2023, https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and

Topics

Human Rights

Ukraine Conflict

Regions

Ukraine

Three years on: Ukraine’s stolen children – the silent crisis that threatens the future

Article by Nataliia Bolshova

Right now, thousands of Ukrainian children do not know if their parents are alive. Tens of thousands have been taken to Russia, while hundreds of thousands have been lost in a broken system.

Three years into Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine, the world has witnessed the forced displacement of millions of Ukrainians, the abduction of thousands of children, and the fragmentation of families on a devastating scale. While international attention has rightly focused on Russia’s war crimes and mass deportations, a parallel crisis is unfolding – one that is less visible but just as devastating: the growing number of Ukrainian children permanently separated from their parents not by missiles, but by a fractured legal system, wartime displacement, and institutional inaction.

The scale of the crisis

The numbers tell a tragic story. More than 2.5 million Ukrainian children have been displaced – many evacuated abroad for safety, others left behind while their parents serve in the Armed Forces.[1]

We know that 30% of children who fled Ukraine with one parent have lost all contact with the other parent who remains in Ukraine.[2]

Meanwhile, 80% of children whose parents serve in the Armed Forces have little or no communication with them.[3]

For more than 20,000 Ukrainian orphans and children who lost their parents in the war the heartbreak did not end there. They have been illegally deported to Russia, where efforts to repatriate them have stalled for three years. Many of those abducted before 2014 have already turned 18 and have been forcibly conscripted into the Russian army to fight against Ukraine.

These are not just numbers – these are children whose futures are being erased.

This problem extends beyond Ukraine’s borders. The breakdown of family ties slows the return of refugees, erodes trust in legal institutions, and weakens post-war recovery.

A system unprepared to reunite families

Ukraine’s legal and social systems were never designed to handle the scale of parental separation caused by war. Cases of parental abduction and alienation existed before the invasion, but the war has multiplied their complexity.

Ukraine’s civil courts, law enforcement agencies, and social services do process these cases, but:

There is no unified system ensuring the protection of children’s rights and the enforcement of court rulings.
Corruption and bureaucratic inertia often render court decisions unenforceable.
Family court proceedings can take 2-4 years, by which time a child’s relationship with the alienated parent may already be irreparably damaged.

The burden of these systemic failures falls entirely on the children. Many suffer profound psychological distress, including anxiety, depression, and, tragically, even suicide.

While these are humanitarian tragedies today, they also pose a long-term challenge for Ukraine’s recovery, demographic stability, and national security.

Without urgent reform, Ukraine risks losing an entire generation.

What needs to happen next

Protecting children’s rights must be a core pillar of Ukraine’s recovery and European integration process. This is not just a moral obligation – it is essential for social stability, national resilience, and Ukraine’s credibility as a democratic state.

Legislative reform and diplomatic engagement

The UK and European partners can play a key role in advocating for urgent reforms in Ukraine’s family law system, ensuring alignment with European human rights standards. International legal expertise and diplomatic support can help ensure that these reforms lead to enforceable protections, not just symbolic commitments.

At the same time, strengthening Ukraine’s legal and social institutions and expanding support programmes for affected children and families is critical to delivering real change.

A generation at risk

Ukraine is fighting for its land, but it must also fight for the generation that will rebuild it.

If we do not act today, Ukraine risks losing not just territory, but its future.

The international community has provided weapons, economic aid, and humanitarian assistance. Now, it must help protect Ukraine’s most vulnerable citizens: its children.

Nataliia is a John Smith Trust Fellow civil rights advocate as well as a committed member of The Child Has a Right, a national initiative dedicated to addressing the escalating crisis of parental alienation and child abduction in Ukraine. Her advocacy is both professional and deeply personal – despite multiple court rulings in her favor, Nataliia has been unable to see her daughter for over 4.5 years. This is due to systemic inefficiencies, an outdated family law framework, and limited enforcement of court decisions.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

[1] United Nations, ‘Two million refugee children flee war in Ukraine in search of safety across borders’, Press Release, UNICEF, 30 March 2022, https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/two-million-refugee-children-flee-war-ukraine-search-safety-across-borders

[2] Obudsman, ‘deportation of ukrainian children is genocide!’, Ukraine Government, 13 September 2024, https://ombudsman.gov.ua/storage/app/media/uploaded-files/UPF%204.pdf

[3] Maksym Savchuk, ‘From the “Youth Army” to the front: how Russia prepares Ukrainian children under occupation for war against their own country’, Radio Svoboda, 16 November 2024, https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/skhemy-ukrayinski-dity-yunarmiya-viyna/33203644.html

Topics

Human Rights

Ukraine Conflict

Regions

Ukraine

Three years on: Are sanctions finally hitting home in Central Asia?

Article by Dr Aijan Sharshenova

February 25, 2025

Three years on: Are sanctions finally hitting home in Central Asia?

Last year, on the second anniversary of the Russian invasion, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the US Department of the Treasury published yet another list of sanctioned companies and individuals. The list contained only a handful of Central Asian entities.^[1] This handful was a sign that the Western threats of secondary sanctions were finally beginning to materialise.

As we enter the fourth year of the invasion, Central Asian governments are still managing to keep an exterior of relative neutrality while playing a dangerous balancing game between Russia, China and the West. The threat of secondary sanctions by the US, UK, and the EU has been there from the very outset, but over the last year they have finally hit home, albeit to a relatively modest extent.^[2]

After the full scale invasion, Central Asia provided relatively easy routes for dual-use commodities to reach Russia from China and Europe alike thanks to the region’s comparatively open borders, favourable trade laws, and opportunistic intermediaries on the ground.^[3] The signs of booming trade with Russia and a sudden increase in EU exports to Armenia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyz Republic (member-states of the Eurasian Economic Union, a Russia-led regional economic integration project) speaks volumes.^[4]^,[5]

Those are not necessarily state-sanctioned activities, but most likely initiatives of profit-driven locals, as well as external exploitation of Central Asian economic regimes, which were designed to attract foreign investment and so-called “digital nomads” – foreign freelancers, who are able to work remotely and spend their money in Central Asian countries. In one of the notorious cases of sanctions evasion, British military technologies were traded through a company set up in Central Asia by a Belarussian Instagram model.^[6]

The Central Asian governments have to deal with the repercussions though. Secondary sanctions affect credibility of the Kyrgyz banking and financial sector, significantly limit Kyrgyz citizens’ ability to use global payment systems, such as Visa and Mastercard, and set a shadow on foreign investment prospects. In addition to these, there are political repercussions too. Russian Prime Minister Mishustin has already attempted to pressurise the Kyrgyz Government for ‘unfairly targeting’ Russian businesses in Kyrgyzstan. The response to this accusation was strong and decisive: no one can be given an unreasonable advantage.^[7]

To what extent the sanctions would and could work remains dubious. Lists of sanctioned entities take time and effort to emerge, while intermediary companies spring up like mushrooms in the region. It finally hits home, but not hard enough to induce any meaningful change.

Dr. Aijan Sharshenova is a Foreign Policy Centre Research Fellow.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

^[1] Catherine Putz, ‘US puts additional Central Asian companies on Russia sanctions list’, The Diplomat, 28 February 2024, https://thediplomat.com/2024/02/us-puts-additional-central-asian-companies-on-russia-sanctions-list/

^[2] Claire Mills, ‘Sanctions against countries supporting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine’, research briefing, House of Commons Library, 17 January 2025,https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10048/

^[3] Samantha Fanger, ‘Central Asia’s Gateway of Dual-Use Technology and Materials to Russia’. Caspian Policy Center, 28 March 2024, https://www.caspianpolicy.org/research/security/central-asias-gateway-of-dual-use-technology-and-materials-to-russia?mc_cid=7751d6b298&mc_eid=221261e860

^[4] Aijan Sharshenova, ‘The Eurasian Economic Union: Pros and cons for smaller member-states’, ISPI Online Dossier, 03 February 2025, https://www.ispionline.it/en/publication/the-eurasian-economic-union-pros-and-cons-for-smaller-member-states-199114

^[5] Maxim Chupilkin, BeataJavorcik, and Alexander Plekhanov, ‘The Eurasian roundabout: Trade flows into Russia through the Caucasus and Central Asia’, EBRD Working Paper no.276, https://www.ebrd.com/publications/working-papers/the-eurasian-roundabout

^[6] Angus Crawford and Tony Smith, ‘UK war tech sent to Russia by Insta model’s firm, documents seen by BBC show’, BBC News Investigations, 20 November 2024, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4vzlx1350o

^[7] Eurasianet, ‘Kyrgyzstan resists Russian pressure to give sanctions-busting firms lenient treatment’, Eurasianet News, 04 February 2025, https://eurasianet.org/kyrgyzstan-resists-russian-pressure-to-give-sanctions-busting-firms-lenient-treatment

Topics

Ukraine Conflict

Regions

Central Asia

Ukraine

Three years on: The impact of Trump 2.0 on the war in Ukraine

Article by Dr Andrew Gawthorpe

In the past few weeks, Europe has been hit with a series of shocks. Firstly, the Trump administration has threatened military force to take control of Greenland, the territory of NATO ally Denmark. Secondly, it began direct talks with Russia over the future of the European security order. Thirdly, the administration escalated its aggressive rhetoric against the European political establishment, with Vice President J.D. Vance suggesting that the Trump administration would rather deal with parties of the far right.^[1]

These three issues cannot be separated from one another. Trump views the war in Ukraine as just one part of a bigger picture. He wants to drastically improve US relations with Russia while forcing Europe into a subordinate position. His goal is to make European countries directly serve the interests of the United States, be it by spending more on their own defence, buying more US goods and services, and even proffering up territory which Washington regards as strategically important.

Viewed from this standpoint, the war in Ukraine looks to Trump like an unnecessary irritant. Its continuation harms US relations with Russia while also compelling the United States to dedicate large amounts of resources to European defence. Caring little for Ukraine itself, Trump would rather end the war speedily by making concessions to Russia – and then move onto bigger issues.

Chief among those issues is the long-term future of the European security order. Russia is making demands similar to those that it made at the outset of the war in 2022, including the withdrawal of US troops from NATO’s eastern border and the recognition of a Russian sphere of influence in its near abroad.^[2] For European officials, this idea is terrifyingly compatible with Trump’s own desire to spend fewer American resources ensuring the security of Europe. They fear concessions to Russia on this issue even more than concessions regarding Ukraine itself.^[3]

What happens next for Ukraine is vitally important, not only first of all for the Ukrainian people, but also because it will create the framework in which Europe and Russia must coexist in the years ahead. It seems likely that Ukraine will be forced to give up much of the territory captured by Russia and to forswear any short-term ambitions to join NATO – points that even the Biden administration were willing to concede.^[4] What is still open to question is whether and to what extent the country will receive credible security guarantees against renewed Russian aggression. Yet given that the US has said it will not give any such guarantee, and that European countries lack the means to enforce one, the future looks bleak for Kyiv.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration’s broader attack on the European political establishment looks set to continue. Trump sees the world as split into spheres of influence in which great powers have the right to coerce and even conquer weaker countries. A Trump administration which is threatening military force to seize Greenland is one which sees Russia’s behaviour in Ukraine as something to emulate, not something to be stopped.

Confronting hostile superpowers to both their east and west, European leaders are faced with their greatest crisis since World War II. This crisis is not just about Ukraine, but the apparent end of the conditions that have made Europe peaceful and prosperous for many decades. It will take a great leap of imagination and concerted political will to find a way out.

Andrew Gawthorpe is an expert on US foreign policy and politics at Leiden University and the creator of America Explained, a podcast and newsletter. He was formerly a research fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School, a teaching fellow at the UK Defence Academy, and a civil servant in the Cabinet Office.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not reflect the views of The Foreign Policy Centre.

^[1] J.D. Vance, ‘JD Vance’s Full Speech on the Fall of Europe’, The Spectator, February 2025, https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jd-vance-what-i-worry-about-is-the-threat-from-within/.

^[2] ‘Kremlin says Ukraine Settlement ‘Impossible’ without Addressing Wider Security Issues’, The Kyiv Post, , February 2025, https://www.kyivpost.com/post/47337.

^[3] ‘Donald Trump Opens the Door to Vladimir Putin’s Grandest Ambitions’, The Financial Times, February 2025, https://www.ft.com/content/2bf263a0-9768-4049-8f7d-239940a49efb.

^[4] Andrew Gawthorpe, ‘The Black Hole at the Heart of America’s Ukraine Strategy’, Atlantische Perspectief, November 2024, https://www.atlcom.nl/artikel-atlantisch-perspectief/the-black-hole-at-the-center-of-americas-ukraine-strategy/.

Topics

Ukraine Conflict

Regions

United States and Canada

United States

Ukraine

Expert Briefing: ‘Central Europe at a time of European and transatlantic challenges’

Join our mailing list

What’s Behind Trump’s Upending of the Global Economy?

Join our mailing list

Three years on: Resilience and leadership – John Smith Fellows shaping Ukraine’s future

Join our mailing list

Three years on: How the power of networking can contribute to a peaceful and democratic future

Join our mailing list

Three years on: What peace should be

Join our mailing list

Three years on: What kind of peace?

Join our mailing list

Three years on: Russia’s War on Ukraine’s Forcibly Displaced Children

Join our mailing list

Three years on: Ukraine’s stolen children – the silent crisis that threatens the future

Join our mailing list

Three years on: Are sanctions finally hitting home in Central Asia?

Join our mailing list

Three years on: The impact of Trump 2.0 on the war in Ukraine

Join our mailing list

Join our mailing list