{T} he specter of Russian imperialism has been hanging over Europe for a long time. However, for many years, some circles and states did not accept this, considering that it was possible to cooperate with Russia and even to build their own economic and political power on this very cooperation. The situation only changed when Russia launched a full-scale war against Ukraine, which forced a shift in the West’s attitude and policies toward Moscow. Today, however, after almost two years of war in Ukraine, there is a growing risk of another reset and a return to talks about future relations between Russia and the West. Sensing this opportunity, the Kremlin has recently stepped up measures calculated to force “negotiations” with Ukraine aimed at freezing the war in place.

This scenario represents a dangerous trap. In essence, after all, the “freezing” of the front would mean a practical recognition of the Russian occupation of Ukrainian soil, a kind of acceptance of war as a legitimate tool of Russian policy. Additionally, it would open the way for further pressure on the West and the corruption of those used to lobby for a return of business relations with Russia. And it would create a propaganda trap — if Ukraine launched a counteroffensive after the conflict had been frozen, it would become the aggressor who violated the terms of the truce accepted by the world.

The growing emphasis on negotiations and a frozen front may benefit Russia in many ways. It gives it a chance to press for the lifting of sanctions and for further actions to increase the potential for aggression. At the same time, Moscow will be able to appease the West with the prospect of “ending the war,” which will be received with relief by many.

At the same time, the intelligence on the Kremlin’s strategic plans leaves no room for doubt: Russia has embarked on an imperial course intended to stretch over many years and is consistently seeking to expand its aggressive military capabilities. This is evident in Russia’s economic situation and structure. Western sanctions have not had a significant impact on Russia’s war-making capability; the Kremlin has succeeded in finding new sources of funding, building new political and economic alliances, and finding ways to neutralize and circumvent sanctions. As a result, the Kremlin has been able to keep increasing spending on the modernization of its military capabilities. In next year’s budget, the Russian government is planning to increase military spending to 6 percent of GDP (10.8 trillion rubles, or $112 billion) from the current 3.9 percent (6.4 trillion rubles, or $70.1 billion). Russia’s continuing military buildup should, in time, allow it to continue the offensive against Ukraine or to threaten another state — perhaps a NATO member.

Nor have sanctions managed to change the hearts and minds of average Russians. On the whole, Russians accept the Kremlin’s imperial policy and share the view that the West is the enemy and Russia is under threat. Since the war began, the state has exerted increased control of the media, peppering the populace with propaganda while censoring, jailing, and exiling dissenting voices. The Kremlin has specifically targeted young people for indoctrination, which raises the prospect of a Russia that will be a threat and a challenge to NATO for decades to come. The Kremlin’s propaganda industry is contributing to the formation of a new, post-Soviet society — a Putinist society in thrall to a dangerous, criminal ideology that questions, among other things, the right to sovereignty of neighboring states.

Whether we like it or not, this new Russia is already pursuing a hybrid war against NATO, using military provocations, propaganda, cyberattacks, migration, diplomatic pressure, blackmail (including energy blackmail), and interference in the elections of democratic states. Putin has publicly and repeatedly voiced his strong objections to the current international order, and in recent years has made specific demands with regard to NATO (for example, concerning the status of Central and Eastern Europe). One must therefore assume that Ukraine is just the first step in a sustained assault on European security.

Central to this assault is a tactic Russia has been honing for decades — disinformation. The Russian security services spend colossal amounts of money identifying weaknesses in Western societies, and then exploiting those weaknesses with content designed to pave the way for Russian imperial plans and outplay the West, often spread by friendly West-based groups. Today, the effects of such information warfare can be seen in the aforementioned push to “freeze the war” and seek a ceasefire at all costs, even at the expense of territorial concessions. For months, Russian propagandists have been incessantly bombarding the West with the message that prolonging the war is too costly, Russia is no longer that threatening, and Ukraine is no longer a reliable partner.

The bottom line is that the Kremlin plans to change the world order, especially in terms of security, and the conquest of Ukraine is a first step in that plan. If the West abandoned Ukraine now, it would be further exposing NATO to Russian aggression in the years to come. Instead, in order to avert the danger from Russia, NATO and the EU must hold strong in their support for Ukraine and continuing developing their military capabilities. The Russian threat must be neutralized, and this is the only way to do it.