Speech by Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (2021–2024), delivered at the London Defence Conference.
It is highly symbolic to speak today, when the world should be commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of the war against fascism. Regrettably, the very country that once suffered under fascism—having appropriated the collective victory—now wages a brutal war of its own. As was the case 80 years ago, women and children are being killed, this time under the banners of propaganda. Conversely, the descendants of those who once surrendered under force are now doing everything they can to defend the Ukrainian people. What has happened to the world?
First and foremost, I would like to express our deepest gratitude to you—our partners. Without your support—financial, military, political, and moral—there would quite simply be no speech from me here today. Western assistance has enabled us to stand our ground. Of course, every delay has come at a high price for us. But by 2025, it has become clear that even this support is no longer sufficient. And I do not mean merely the quantity or timing of aid—though those still matter.
Today, I wish to speak about growing threats that are dismantling the global order and may soon bring every one of us to the point of needing support ourselves. These developments take place amid the war in Ukraine, where, it is clear to all, Ukrainian soldiers are fighting not only Russian forces, but also the combined resources—and now troops—of Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran.
Does it not strike you as strange that in the 21st century, exactly 80 years after the end of the bloodiest war in human history, there is a conflict raging in the very heart of Europe that has now lasted eleven years and claims more victims each day? Are you not alarmed? And what of the so-called global order—does it still exist?
Here is what the “global order” has meant for Ukraine. Try explaining it to children whose parents were killed at the front. It is impossible to explain it to parents who lost innocent sons and daughters. I can tell you what it is like to speak with mothers who do not even know where their children are, and who cling to hope for a miracle.
Let us examine what this “global order” meant for Ukraine prior to 8 August 2008. I return to that date deliberately, because it was then—when Russian missiles and shells began falling on Georgian cities—that this world order ought to have made itself known. But it remained silent, watching as one state permitted itself to kill the people of another. And what of the rules underpinning that order? The rules supposedly safeguarded by the United Nations? They, too, remained silent. Seventeen years later, in 2025, that same organisation could not even officially acknowledge the daily killing of Ukrainians.
In 2014, the global order finally expressed concern. That concern culminated on 24 February 2022 when, as in 1941, new invaders launched a full-scale assault on Ukraine at 4 o’clock in the morning. Since then, Ukraine has lost tens of thousands of lives and hundreds of thousands have been wounded. Millions have lost their homes. Millions more have fled, seeking safety for their children. The occupied territories resemble apocalyptic wastelands.
Every day, the same enemy terrorises civilians with rockets, bombs, and drones, specifically targeting women and children. Most men are at the front. This is what the global order has meant for Ukrainians: nothing. It did not exist in 2014, nor in 2022, nor today. Perhaps you believe you are more fortunate—after all, you are not Ukraine. You think it cannot happen to you. I must disappoint you. Many in Ukraine believed that, too—in 2008, and in 2014. Some of those very people, now fighting for the enemy, returned in 2022 to kill their former neighbours and relatives.
I find it especially interesting to observe those in Europe who were shocked by emotional speeches in Munich in 2025, yet were seemingly unmoved by eleven years of war next door in Ukraine.
As a result, Ukraine—excluded from the global order—has been forced to fight for the right to exist with weapons in hand, at the cost of our own people’s lives. And we will ensure that in any future global order, Ukraine is not excluded.
But that global order, as described in the works of liberal thinkers, is already gone. It collapsed under the pressure of discontent on one side, and fear and impotence on the other. Historically based on rules and the balance of power, the existing system has begun to fall apart. Rules should be enforced by the coercive capacity of global leaders—but those leaders are no longer willing or able to do so.
Rules for coexistence no longer apply. The institutions charged with enforcing them are now aligned with those who reject them.
Treaties have lost their force. The disintegration of the global security architecture calls into question the concept of international guarantees. The Budapest Memorandum is worth no more than NATO’s Article 5. The very idea of legal, diplomatic, or military security guarantees has been stripped of meaning. Ukraine’s own experience demonstrates that such guarantees no longer exist.
The old balance of power—the one we studied in our universities—has disappeared. It was not only morally lost, but physically. If someone today measures military strength against the standards of the Iraq war under Article 5, I feel compelled to express my sympathy.
Another important issue is morality—a concept few wish to mention today. The global order should have been grounded in universal human morality. But where is it? Human life must be the highest value. In the absence of effective political and legal regulation, moral principles should guide states. But even morality has been eroded—systematically dismantled by those who reject the existing order.
New information technologies have reshaped society, transforming communication. Traditional media has given way to social platforms. Filters that once slowed the spread of misinformation are gone. A madman can now become an “expert” overnight, influencing millions—and, by extension, national policy.
While one part of humanity indulged in comfort and debated fairness and inclusion, the other sharpened its blades and raised killers. Even the very institution once responsible for global morality could not bring itself to name the aggressor. For some, morality is murder. For others, it is just business.
So let us ask the main question: what role do the existing alliances—once the cornerstone of the world order—now serve?
It is not easy, and not pleasant, to evaluate those who have helped us. But if we are to move forward, I must be honest and state my personal view.
I hope that NATO will pass this stress test, which was inevitable. I truly hope the challenge remains moral rather than material. But that is only my hope.
NATO is gripped by fear—fear of expanding to include countries like Ukraine, Moldova, or Georgia. This fear stems from Russia’s assertion that such countries belong to it. But then, what is NATO for if it fears having enemies? Can it still serve as a guarantor of security?
Fear of escalation, “red lines”, and other limits raises questions—even among some NATO members—about whether Article 5 would be honoured. That is a deeply troubling signal.
I have often said that the nature of modern war has changed—and continues to change. I am not referring only to drones. Do not deceive yourselves into thinking you only need to reform your defence industries or rearm. You need a new national policy—akin to that seen during the harnessing of nuclear energy or the space race.
This is about science, production, military doctrine, and policy. New tactics, organisation, training, and budgetary planning are required. And this transformation demands not only resources, but time. If NATO decided this evening to abandon tanks and focus on technology, it would take five years to reach the level Ukraine achieved in 2024. And by then, technology—and our adversaries—will have moved on.
The nature of modern warfare has outpaced NATO’s capabilities. Its current potential could be exhausted rapidly. A future multi-regional conflict would drain its resources even faster.
These are just a few examples of how to assess alliances realistically. I doubt that our adversaries are unaware of these weaknesses.
So what should be done?
It starts with leadership—leaders courageous enough to face the truth and guide us into the future. Today’s politicians search for victories in the past: the Soviet Union, pre-1997 NATO borders, “Great America”, Greater Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, Imperial China.
But the world has changed. Technological progress makes returning to the past impossible. That is why we still have the chance to secure the future for our children.
Global problems demand global solutions. We must construct an alternative to the emerging world order of dictatorships.
The West cannot allow Ukraine to lose. Ukraine is the barrier to that authoritarian future.
The next step must be to build a new European security architecture. Given the direction of American policy, the transatlantic security contract appears to be ending.
Europe needs Ukraine as a shield. We have the largest army on the continent—an army that knows how to resist Russia and conduct high-tech warfare.
Ukraine needs Europe for investment and political and moral support.
Europe must consolidate. Today’s difficulties present an opportunity to forge a new alliance—first in security, then economically. Ukraine must be part of it. Without Ukraine, it cannot succeed.
New alliances and coalitions lie ahead. Rapid technological progress offers security—only to those who can form agile coalitions. Technological competition no longer depends solely on GDP. Intelligence tools, advanced weaponry, electronic warfare, and situational awareness are now within reach for almost any state.
At the same time, the war in Ukraine and global military developments show that no country—not even the United States—can dominate all aspects of modern defence technology. The US is falling behind in 5G, hypersonic weapons, electronic warfare, semiconductors, directed energy, and quantum technologies.
Therefore, joint development and sharing of advanced technologies, enhanced manufacturing, and resource consolidation will be vital for any state seeking security through technological superiority. Control over critical resources and technologies will be a matter of survival.
Finally: for such alliances, education and science are the best investments. Innovation will be the decisive competitive edge of the future.
