Militarized economy, nuclear weapons, and reliable allies: U.S. intelligence on global threats and key takeaways for Ukraine

Contents

1. Main geopolitical “actors” that threaten the United States

2. Strategic assessment of Russia and the Russian-Ukrainian War

3. Warfare and development at several levels

4. CIA's assessment of Ukraine's and Russia's capabilities to continue the war. Conclusions

Espreso has analyzed the warnings from U.S. intelligence and the real threats it prioritizes.

This material was prepared in cooperation with the Consortium for Defense Information (CDI), a project that unites Ukrainian analytical and research organizations to enhance information and analytical support in national security, defense, and geopolitics.

The report was authored by Mykhailo Samus, Director of the New Geopolitics Research Network and co-founder of the Consortium for Defense Information. The text was compiled by Volodymyr Fedorovych for Espreso.

Main geopolitical “actors” that threaten the U.S.

The U.S. Intelligence Community's annual threat assessment provides analytical conclusions on global threats. Despite being the first official strategic document prepared by the Trump administration — whose competence is often questioned — it is regarded as a well-structured and high-quality assessment.  

The report also addresses threats highlighted in Donald Trump's election campaign. These include international drug cartels, transnational Islamist radical groups, international organized crime syndicates, and mass illegal immigration.

Regarding long-term and persistent threats, several states have been identified as capable of significantly impacting the United States' economic and military power both locally and globally.

Among them, China stands as the largest and most powerful. However, other geopolitical players, including Iran, Russia, and North Korea, are also increasing their influence and threat levels.

Intelligence highlights the fact that cooperation between these states could drastically reshape the global landscape. In this scenario, there is a real risk of one actor dragging another into conflict, whether political or economic.

Strategic assessment of Russia and Russian-Ukrainian war

U.S. analysts assert that Russia perceives its prolonged war with Ukraine as a proxy conflict against NATO and the West. Intelligence assessments suggest that the narratives frequently echoed by Russian propaganda reflect the Kremlin's actual motives. From Russia’s perspective, this war is a countermeasure against the expansion of the Western world that further deepens tensions between NATO and Moscow.

As a result, the prolonged military-political conflict, the Kremlin's full-scale shift to a war economy, and ongoing nuclear threats pose significant obstacles to the peace the U.S. had envisioned.

However, regardless of when the war ends or its outcome, the U.S. intelligence community views Russia as a resilient and adaptable player. Despite substantial economic and military losses, Russia remains on stable footing, largely due to the support of its key allies — China, Iran, and North Korea.

This underscores Putin's disregard for the cost of war, as he sees it as a decisive factor in Russia’s broader geopolitical rivalry with the United States.

Interestingly, intelligence highlights the passivity of the Russian population. Moreover, it asserts that the likelihood of an alternative to Putin emerging is at its lowest point since the beginning of his rule.

At the same time, sanctions imposed by the collective West have driven the Kremlin to seek alternative resources, forge new partnerships, and develop new instruments of state influence. Russia is actively leveraging the BRICS platform to undermine the dominance of the U.S. dollar and reshape global processes.

Warfare and development at several levels

As practice shows, the loss of manpower and equipment has not deterred Russia from pursuing its military ambitions. The aggressor state continues to portray itself as a dominant geopolitical player, promoting its nuclear arsenal, as well as its naval and air forces.

The intelligence community notes that engaging in aggressive hostilities has only helped Russia strengthen its military potential. The battlefield serves as a testing ground for refining new tactics and adapting old ones. For example, intelligence highlights Russia’s advancements in electronic warfare, UAV capabilities, and the development of strike systems.

Special attention is also given to the cyber threats posed by Russia, identifying it as the leading actor in this domain. A key factor behind this elevated risk is Russia’s integration of cyber operations into its military strategy, allowing it to gain an edge in future conflicts.

However, hacking is just one aspect of Russia’s hybrid warfare. The Kremlin also employs large-scale disinformation campaigns, sophisticated multi-layered propaganda, controlled media, and networks of influence agents. These tools are systematically and effectively used to sow discord and destabilize both Europe and the United States.

The good old strategy of nuclear deterrence remains firmly in place. However, in today’s geopolitical landscape, it is no longer just a means of warning adversaries but also a mechanism for expanding capabilities, developing new missile delivery systems.

Intelligence analysts also highlight Russia’s focus on the Arctic, where it has effectively seized control of nearly half the region. Neither sanctions nor battlefield losses have deterred its expansionist efforts there.

Considering all these factors, the U.S. intelligence community continues to view Russia as a serious threat to the West. It underscores Russia’s unique adaptability, strategic patience, and capacity to rebuild despite the war in Ukraine and ongoing sanctions. Consequently, Russia is perceived as a long-term global threat, with its aggression against Ukraine serving as yet another confirmation of this assessment.

CIA's assessment of Ukraine's and Russia's capabilities to continue the war. Conclusions

The intelligence community pays considerable attention to CIA Director John Ratcliffe's March 25 speech to the U.S. Congress. The head of the agency then noted that both Ukraine and Russia show serious resilience and the ability to continue waging a protracted war. 

Ratcliffe supported his speech with several key points, including significant investments in the military-industrial complex and increased operational capabilities, the determination of the political leadership of both countries, the support of the population in their desire to continue the war, and the West's support for Ukraine, which does not stop Russia, but creates additional pressure. 

From the above analytics and CIA data, we can conclude that Russia and Ukraine are ready to continue the war. However, the United States has no real tools to influence the aggressor country. It believes that increasing pressure, given the arguments emphasized above, will only deepen the conflict. 

Important in this conclusion is the fact that Ukraine needs to build up its military power and continue reforms, particularly in defense, cybersecurity, and the economy. This also means more concrete development of the Defense Forces and engagement of an active civil society to strengthen national resilience. 

Working with Europe is also a key factor in countering Russian aggression. The strategic direction is cooperation in creating military and political alliances and the European Defense Forces.

Read also: Ukraine's strategy to maintain 'maritime corridor' if Riyadh deal takes effect: analysis