Executive Summary Ukraine’s trajectory since 2022 reflects a profound transformation. From a state widely expected to collapse under Russian assault, it has evolved into a resilient military actor capable not only of enduring but of adapting and imposing significant costs on a larger adversary. This evolution has enhanced Ukraine’s international standing and, increasingly, its strategic relevance beyond Europe. A key driver of this shift has been constraint. Faced with uncertainty regarding Western support, Ukraine has been compelled to innovate rapidly, developing advanced capabilities in drone warfare, air defense, and precision strikes on critical infrastructure. These tools—effective and relatively cost-efficient—have proven their value under real combat conditions. This experience is now attracting growing interest in the Middle East, where states confront similar threats from drones, missiles, and asymmetric attacks. Ukraine’s recent diplomatic outreach to Gulf countries reflects both a search for new partnerships and a recognition that its wartime expertise has become a strategic asset. In a context of evolving U.S. engagement and increasing regional uncertainty, Ukraine is positioning itself as a complementary security partner—offering practical, battlefield-tested solutions rather than traditional guarantees. Introduction Until recently, Ukraine was widely perceived as a country in need—a state dependent on external assistance for its security and economic survival. Today, while still locked in a brutal war of attrition, it is increasingly seen as a source of valuable military expertise. Savaged by war, yet shaped by it, Ukraine has acquired a degree of proficiency in modern warfare that is now in demand well beyond Europe. This shift is not merely symbolic. It reflects a deeper transformation in Ukraine’s strategic posture. Capabilities forged under extreme pressure—particularly in drone warfare, air defense, and strikes on critical infrastructure—are beginning to translate into diplomatic leverage. Ukraine is no longer only the object of international security policy; it is gradually becoming a contributor to it. Nowhere is this evolution more visible than in the Middle East. As regional actors confront persistent threats from missiles, drones, and asymmetric warfare—and as uncertainty surrounding traditional security guarantees grows—the demand for practical, battlefield-tested solutions is increasing. In this context, Ukraine’s wartime experience is emerging as a source of relevance, opening new avenues for cooperation that would have seemed unlikely only a few years ago. I. From Vulnerability to Strategic Relevance The contrast with Ukraine’s position just four years ago is striking. When Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine appeared ill-prepared to withstand the assault. Its economy was burdened by structural weaknesses inherited from the post-Soviet era, its political system remained fragmented, and its military—despite reforms since 2014—was widely viewed as inferior to Russia’s. Expectations of a rapid collapse were widespread. Kyiv was predicted to fall within days, and Ukraine itself to be reduced to a subordinate, quasi-client state under Moscow’s control. Such assumptions reflected not only Russia’s perceived military superiority but also a broader skepticism regarding Ukraine’s capacity for sustained resistance. That outcome did not materialize. Instead, Ukraine demonstrated an unexpected degree of resilience. Its armed forces adapted quickly, combining Western-supplied systems with indigenous solutions, and exploiting Russia’s operational shortcomings. Over time, Ukraine not only stabilized the front but also imposed significant costs on Russian forces—targeting supply lines, command structures, and energy infrastructure. While the war remains unresolved, Ukraine’s ability to endure—and to strike back—has reshaped perceptions of its military effectiveness. It has also undermined Russia’s reputation as a military superpower, while gradually enhancing its own standing. Ukraine is no longer seen merely as a battleground. It is increasingly perceived as a source of operational knowledge. II. Innovation Under Constraint This transformation has been driven in large part by constraint. Throughout much of the conflict, Ukraine faced persistent uncertainty regarding the scope and continuity of Western support. Under President Joe Biden, the United States provided substantial assistance but often hesitated to supply advanced capabilities—particularly those that might enable deep strikes into Russian territory—out of concern for escalation. Ukraine, in effect, was allowed not to lose the war, but not fully enabled to win it. With the return of President Donald Trump to the White House in January 2025, this uncertainty deepened further. U.S. military and financial assistance was significantly reduced, reflecting both domestic political dynamics and a broader shift toward a more selective and transactional approach to foreign commitments. Responsibility for supporting Ukraine was increasingly shifted to European allies, many of whom struggled to compensate for the shortfall. Paradoxically, this environment proved to be a catalyst for innovation. Faced with persistent gaps in defense procurement, Ukrainian forces were compelled to improvise, adapt, and innovate at speed. The result has been a remarkable acceleration in military learning. Ukraine has become a leader in the development and deployment of unmanned systems. Low-cost aerial drones are now integral to reconnaissance, targeting, and strike operations. Maritime drones have disrupted Russian naval activity in the Black Sea. At the same time, Ukrainian forces have developed increasingly effective counter-drone capabilities in response to the widespread use of Iranian-designed loitering munitions. Equally important has been the integration of these tools into a broader operational framework. Ukraine has refined a model of warfare that emphasizes decentralization, adaptability, and rapid feedback loops between the battlefield and the defense-industrial base. Rather than relying exclusively on expensive, high-end platforms, it has demonstrated the strategic value of scalable, relatively inexpensive technologies deployed in large numbers. In doing so, Ukraine has effectively pioneered a form of cost-effective warfare that is particularly relevant for states facing diverse threats under financial and technological constraints. III. The Middle East and the Search for Security Alternatives It is precisely this experience that is now attracting attention in the Middle East. The region has witnessed a steady increase in the use of drones and missiles, particularly by Iran and its network of proxies. Attacks on energy infrastructure, shipping routes, and urban centers have underscored the vulnerability of even well-resourced states. For Gulf countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar, these threats are immediate and recurring. Iranian-backed actors have demonstrated the capacity to strike critical assets with relatively low-cost systems, creating disproportionate economic and strategic effects. Defending against such threats requires not only advanced technology but also operational experience in dealing with sustained and asymmetric attacks. Ukraine offers precisely that. Its experience in detecting, tracking, and neutralizing drone swarms, as well as its ability to operate under continuous pressure, has direct relevance for regional actors. Moreover, its approach—combining defensive measures with targeted strikes on launch sites and logistical networks—aligns with the needs of states seeking not only to defend but also to deter. President Zelensky’s tour of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar in early 2026, culminating in the signing of long-term defense agreements, reflects this growing convergence of interests. For Ukraine, these partnerships represent an opportunity to diversify its strategic outreach and reduce dependence on Western support. For Gulf states, they provide access to practical, battlefield-tested expertise at a time of mounting uncertainty. This dynamic is reinforced by broader changes in the international system. The United States remains the most influential external actor in the Middle East, but its role is increasingly perceived as less predictable. The evolution of American foreign policy toward greater selectivity and burden-sharing has prompted regional actors to reassess their long-term reliance on Washington. In this context, the search for supplementary partnerships has become a rational response. Ukraine’s emergence as a provider of specific military capabilities fits naturally into this trend. It does not replace traditional alliances, but it complements them—offering a layer of practical expertise shaped by recent high-intensity conflict. IV. Diplomacy, Energy, and Strategic Positioning Ukraine’s engagement with the Middle East is not driven solely by military considerations. Economic and energy factors are equally significant, and in many respects structurally more enduring. The war has inflicted extensive and repeated damage on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, exposing its vulnerability and increasing its dependence on external support, investment, and diversification of supply. In this context, the Middle East—particularly the Gulf—represents not only a market for Ukraine’s emerging security expertise, but also a potential source of long-term strategic resilience. Energy partnerships, whether in the form of direct supply arrangements, investment in reconstruction, or cooperation in energy technologies, are likely to play an important role in Ukraine’s post-war recovery. These relationships extend beyond immediate wartime needs, embedding Ukraine in a broader network of interdependence that complements its Euro-Atlantic orientation. At the same time, instability affecting key maritime corridors, especially around the Strait of Hormuz, reinforces the interconnected nature of European and Middle Eastern security. Disruptions in Gulf energy flows have global repercussions, including for Ukraine’s own economic prospects. This creates a convergence of interests: Gulf states seek stability and protection for their export routes, while Ukraine seeks reliable access to energy and investment. Security cooperation thus becomes part of a wider strategic equation linking defense, economics, and infrastructure. President Zelensky has sought to capitalize on these dynamics through active and increasingly diversified diplomacy. His outreach to Gulf capitals reflects a deliberate effort to move beyond a primarily Euro-Atlantic focus and to reposition Ukraine as a more globally engaged actor. While Zelensky’s personal role remains visible, this diplomatic shift is also institutional, involving Ukraine’s defense-industrial sector, technology base, and military planning structures. Importantly, Ukraine is no longer approaching these relationships solely as a petitioner. While it continues to require external support, it is increasingly able to offer something in return: practical expertise tested under real conditions and adaptable to different operational environments. This exchange—capabilities for capital, experience for investment—marks a subtle but meaningful shift in Ukraine’s international posture. There are, however, clear limits to this strategy. Ukraine’s capacity to project influence remains constrained by the ongoing war, its defense industry operates under pressure, and its diplomatic resources are finite. Yet these constraints reinforce rather than undermine the logic of its approach. Ukraine is not seeking to become a comprehensive security actor in the Middle East, but to position itself in specific niches where its experience provides a comparative advantage. Conclusion: From Dependency to Strategic Utility Ukraine’s trajectory since 2022 reflects more than resilience. It marks a shift in strategic function. A country once defined by its vulnerability is gradually acquiring leverage derived from experience, adaptation, and necessity. This does not make Ukraine a great power, nor does it remove the constraints under which it operates. Yet those constraints have become the very source of its transformation. Ukraine’s relevance today lies not in scale, but in utility. It has become a repository of operational knowledge in modern, technology-driven warfare—knowledge that is transferable, actionable, and immediately applicable to other theaters. For Middle Eastern states facing the growing challenge of drones, missiles, and infrastructure vulnerability, Ukraine represents a new type of partner: not a guarantor of security, but a provider of solutions. For Ukraine, this role offers a degree of strategic flexibility, reducing dependence on uncertain Western support while expanding its network of relationships. In a more fragmented international order, such forms of influence matter. Ukraine is unlikely to become a central actor in the Middle East, but it is increasingly positioned to become a relevant one.