As Ukraine and Europe enter 2025 with a worsening situation on the battlefield and the incoming Trump administration hoping to quickly reach some kind of peace in Russia’s all-out war, the first months of the year look to be fundamental in deciding the outcome of the war.
While much will be decided on the battlefield, the race is on for Western countries to come together and find the strongest and most united position in Ukraine, but many of the biggest players continue to hold back.
Since Trump’s re-election, discussions have been reported between several countries on the topic of braver support for Ukraine, including placing foreign troops inside Ukrainian territory; though no public decisions have been made.
Not long after Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna called for the West to look into “boots on the ground” options of securing Ukrainian-controlled territory from a repeat Russian invasion after a peace deal, the Kyiv Independent spoke to the minister in Tallinn.
This conversation is part of a series of interviews with decision-makers in the Nordic and Baltic countries conducted during the European screening tour of the Kyiv Independent’s documentary film “Can You Hear Me? The invisible battles of Ukrainian military medics.”
Editor’s note: The transcript of this interview has been edited for length and clarity.
The Kyiv Independent: From the Estonian perspective, how decisive is this moment in time for Ukraine and the next few months for Ukraine and for the security of Europe as a whole?
Margus Tsahkna: On Feb. 24 (2022), (Russian President Vladimir) Putin's plan was to take over (Kyiv) within a couple of days, and he did not succeed. We have to remember that Ukraine has been very successful. We always talk about how now peace must be done and wrap it up, and also that Ukraine is in a bad position. But, actually, Ukraine has been able to fight back.
Europe has been waking up. I was the defense minister in 2016-17, and I see the total difference in Europe (compared to then). We have realized two things. One is that Russia is an aggressive country and it will remain a threat for Europe, not only for Ukraine. Secondly, that we can fight back. It is very important that this change of mentality is there. And now, of course, the situation is very complicated, there are more and more talks about peace.
But what is the meaning of peace? Who is winning? Who is losing? Of course, Putin is putting the narrative very actively on the table that he's winning, he's gaining more territories.
For Ukraine, it's really, really complicated to fight back, we understand this. From an Estonian perspective, we advocate and we ask everybody to give more, especially in defense and military support. Honestly, we all want peace, most Ukrainians want peace. But the peace must be just and long-lasting.
One thing we don't see is actually Putin wanting peace. You cannot weaken your positions by talking about peace when the other side is actually committing this aggression, and not showing any willingness to change the goal.
The goal for Putin was not to gain more territories. The goal was actually to take down the Ukrainian democratic government – he has said publicly that such a nation as Ukraine does not exist. This is the goal, and I don't see that it has changed at all. So I'm advocating to our allies publicly that we need to understand that any kind of ceasefire is not peace. Any kind of peace without security guarantees is not actually peace. And there cannot be a peace process without Ukraine, it's impossible.
"President Trump is interested in a weak ceasefire because then Russia will remain a threat."
We need to make Ukraine's position stronger. Of course, there is a player entering now in the middle of January to the White House, (U.S. President-elect) Donald Trump. He is listening pretty carefully to what we have said and what we are saying, meeting different leaders of European countries. We just need to put the arguments on the table because I don’t think that President Trump is interested in a weak ceasefire because then Russia will remain a threat.
The Kyiv Independent: In your discussions with partners, how close are we, do you think, to a real unified understanding that peace must come with hard deterrence against a repeat invasion?
Margus Tsahkna: I see the change that countries understand that Russia will remain a threat to Europe, it's there. More and more, different nations and governments are talking about what more we can do.
We have increased our defense investments. Not all of us, mainly the bordering (with Russia) countries and the Nordic countries. But still, too many countries are thinking that maybe business as usual can come back, that let's have peace and maybe normal life will return. It will not.
We have also seen that for countries neighboring Russia, a “neutral” position is just a green light for Putin. And we need to understand as well that Putin is not a leader of the country who is taking care of his nation. He has built up a regime of terror, of fear, around the idea of restoring the empire.
He is an old man, and he knows that he is fighting for his life. So it is not so easy for him to stop this war machine he has built up. It is based on fear in their own society. It is based on a war economy. The war is the basic core his power is relying on. It is not easy anymore to stop it without using force or without fighting against this aggression. And Ukrainians, you are doing that. Not us.
The Kyiv Independent: Just recently, we’ve seen top Russian representatives say that there will be no freezing of the conflict. Do you think that we should take what they're saying at face value, that they simply do not plan to stop? Or are they positioning themselves for negotiations with the highest possible demands?
Margus Tsahkna: Of course, Russia is positioning. Putin is afraid of President Trump's incoming administration, and Russia is not so secure on the resources front.
North Korean troops are there, of course, but Russia also is relying on North Korean ammunition, Iranian drones, and economic support from China.
With this talk, they are trying to strengthen their position. But we don't have to believe that. This peace and just peace will be made on the battlefield, so we need to focus on how we can make Ukraine’s position stronger.
If President (Volodymyr) Zelensky feels that all the Western partners are just pushing him to a peace deal, it's not a very strong position. I totally agree with the European Union’s high representative of foreign policy (former Estonian Prime Minister) Kaja Kallas, who said we shouldn’t push Ukraine to peace talks if we see that Putin has not changed his goal.
The Kyiv Independent: Zelensky has said in several interviews that Ukraine would be ready to stop the war on their side if it was in exchange for NATO membership, but this is firmly opposed by some of the biggest players in NATO. Does Estonia agree that NATO membership is the only option, and if there are other options, what could they be?
Margus Tsahkna: The main question is that if there is a post-war situation, how can we give Ukraine solid security guarantees? With Putin, we know that these must be military security guarantees. We had the Minsk agreements, and Ukraine signed “security guarantees” in 1994 (Budapest Memorandum), and they were not security guarantees.
From an Estonian perspective, we are not only talking about Ukraine: We are talking about the European, regional security guarantees, and Ukraine is part of that.
What are these security guarantees in real life? Are they peacekeeping missions, military missions? Our point is very clear: NATO membership for Ukraine is the most secure, most clear, most efficient, and cheapest way to give real security guarantees. Any other structure is much more complicated.
"NATO membership for Ukraine is the most secure, most clear, most efficient, and cheapest way to give real security guarantees."
We have examples from the past as West Germany was taken into NATO when the East part was actually occupied. It's a matter of political will. But the honest thing is as well, we don't exactly know President Trump’s position, and what the official plan will be.
So we need to use this time first to support Ukraine because we are not only securing the situation in Ukraine, we are securing Europe. We are in a year like 1938 in Europe, just before the Munich meeting when Prime Minister (Neville) Chamberlain went back to Great Britain and showed the white paper and said now the peace is here.
We can go back home and say that we brought peace, but if it is a Chamberlain peace, it will be the start of more and more aggression. Now, we have every opportunity to avoid everything that came after 1938: World War II. This is not only about Europe, it is about the world order.
The UN Charter is meant to uphold this order, and if it doesn't work, if it's not able now to support Ukraine and forge the kind of peace that is just and long-lasting, then this system may collapse, and it affects everybody.
The Kyiv Independent: You have made headlines a few times by being the first major high-level state representative to openly call for the boots-on-the-ground idea to be looked at seriously. Could you share something about how you imagine that working, especially if Russia is interested in invading again?
Margus Tsahkna: Of course, it is unclear, because what we are witnessing right now is full aggression. Russia is more aggressive than at any time during the last two and a half years, especially now with the North Korean troops there. This makes this conflict or this aggression totally different already on the political and global level. The other thing is that there are no peace talks right now, we don't see that Putin would like to have any kind of peace.
It's very hard to imagine what kind of security guarantees without NATO membership can be there, but there must be a real backup system for the deal, whatever it ends up being. This is the right time to discuss readiness, what one country or another is ready to do. Of course, this cannot be done without the U.S., without the big countries, but it's too early to share because it's just in the beginning and we have many preconditions that are not there yet.
The Kyiv Independent: Is there a scenario where European countries, those who have the same clarity as Estonia, Poland, and others, are compelled to take maybe braver steps even without the US?
Margus Tsahkna: I understand your concern. I was defense minister when Trump first entered the White House, and there was a lot of speculation about what would happen. In the end, we gained more troops on the ground, more military and financial support because of the regional security situation. The honest answer is, we don't know yet what will be Trump's plan or proposition. We're using this time to explain, to put arguments on the table.
This is not an isolated problem. It is all connected. It's all connected with Iran, with China. China will probably be at the center of President Trump's foreign policy. So this is all connected. Many people have said many things during their political campaigns, but what counts is what will really happen.
I'm not going to speculate about what could be with or without the U.S. Our security in Europe is connected to the U.S. and the other way around, our economies are very much connected. This is a global square, and Ukraine is playing a very crucial role, so let's do things in the right order. Our duty, as well as that of Ukraine’s leaders, is to explain.
The Kyiv Independent: You mention that the most important thing is improving Ukraine's position on the battlefield. But from the Ukrainian perspective, the feeling is that the status quo is not working, especially because Ukraine's ability to stay in the war is also limited by manpower. Are there other asymmetrical political measures that braver European countries could take to show Putin that the West does not plan in any way to abandon Ukraine?
Margus Tsahkna: We have had (French) President (Emmanuel) Macron’s initiatives (floating the idea of French troops in Ukraine). These opportunities are all there: for example, training missions and many other things. But I believe the most sustainable for the long run idea is to invest heavily in Ukraine, in its defense industry, technological capabilities, and so on. We need to give what Ukrainians are asking for, and Ukraine is not asking for boots on the ground to go to the battlefield, because maybe it's not even a smart idea.
These are complicated times. We have elections in Germany, we have President Trump entering the White House with all the rhetoric that we have heard. Of course, Putin is using this opportunity, because he has only one voice, but we have many different voices.
I cannot even personally imagine the situation that you as a nation and those people on the front are going through. It's hard for us Estonians to come back so often from different meetings with no decisions, then meeting our Ukrainian friends and explaining that, yes, we want to do more, but somehow we are not able to.
If we had given everything that we have within the last two and a half years straight away, Russia would already have been pushed back to Russia. There is fear in the Western part of the world about what happens if Putin loses. I remember once the same fear, of what if the Soviet Union collapses. This fear of Putin's collapse is actually stopping many, many decisions. We need to keep pushing.
The Kyiv Independent: If they are afraid of Russia losing, do you think something needs to get much worse before the West sees the threat of Ukraine losing, to finally make that final step to wake up?
Margus Tsahkna: We have witnessed from the past what happens if Putin has an opportunity to continue, and he will continue anyway.
I really hope that we don't need the years 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 to finally understand that we could have a different situation. That's why I'm bringing this parallel with the Munich meeting in 1938.
But I'm actually more positive that we can support Ukraine based on the understanding that Ukrainians are not fighting only for themselves and for us, but instead of us. I can say it as a former defense minister, because we saw in 2016-17, on the other side of our borders, 120,000 troops ready to go within 48 hours. These troops do not exist anymore. They were sent to Ukraine. They are dead.
So that's why I'm saying that you are fighting instead of us, and this knowledge is finally pretty widespread.
Stay warm with Ukrainian traditions this winter. Shop our seasonal merch collection.
shop now
