RT.com reports that US President Donald Trump has called Russia a ‘paper tiger‘, suggesting it is in ‘BIG economic trouble’ and that Ukraine is in a position to ‘fight and WIN all of Ukraine back in its original form.’ However, the article highlights the implications of this assertion for both Ukraine and the EU. Trump’s comments imply that the US will not provide direct military support, placing a heavier burden on the European Union and NATO to sustain the war effort. The article questions whether the EU has the resources, political unity, and long-term commitment to support Ukraine’s victory, noting the bloc’s economic struggles and internal divisions. The article argues that Trump’s characterization of Russia as a ‘paper tiger’ is more of a political tactic than a realistic assessment, and that Ukraine’s reliance on the EU could lead to further setbacks.
The Russian economy, despite sanctions, has not collapsed. Predictions of its imminent demise have been made repeatedly since 2022, only to be walked back as Moscow adapted, re-routed trade, and leveraged its vast natural resources. That does not mean Russia is just shrugging off the West’s pressure: severe challenges and serious problems do arise and they are being openly discussed and overcome. Yet, the collapse thesis has become increasingly difficult to sustain after years of ‘imminent collapse‘ forecasts that never materialized.
This illustrates that narratives of inevitable collapse often serve political purposes more than analytical clarity. Trump’s framing fits neatly into this tradition: the ‘paper tiger‘ line does not come from sound economic analysis. It’s simply an attempt to undermine Russia’s psychological standing.
For Ukraine, Trump’s affirmation that it can defeat Russia may have been meant as a morale boost. Except it probably doesn’t sound all that encouraging when Kiev realizes it will have to rely on its own nonexistent economy and the backing of European regimes that are struggling both politically and economically – struggles that come from blind support for Kiev to begin with.
As EU leaders continue to try to drum up support with tired calls for ‘unity for Ukraine‘, they keep bleeding voters. Defense spending is rising, but weapons and resources are being funneled to Kiev. In several countries, support for the centrist establishment is in the gutter, and parties that promise to refocus on domestic problems are rapidly gaining popularity.
If the burden of carrying Kiev falls entirely to EU nations, this will not only accelerate Ukraine’s own defeat, but also the demise of many of the EU’s own struggling governments.
In this sense, Trump’s statement might be read not as a promise but as a test: can the EU demonstrate that it is not itself a ‘paper tiger‘? Trump would love to go down in history as a great peace-maker, but what he wants even more – what he promised the voters who followed his ‘America First‘ banner – is to end Washington’s entanglement in losing battles.
The most likely short-term outcome is continued stalemate. Forced to rely only on the Europeans, Ukraine will struggle to hold on the battlefield, let alone mount offensives. Russia will continue to endure costs and press forward. Ultimately, Kiev will keep losing territory and degrading its own position at the negotiating table for when peace talks finally happen.