Will Ukraine receive any 'meaningful security guarantees from its Western allies'? • FRANCE 24

Key Concepts

• Territorial Concessions: Ukraine being asked to cede territory it currently controls.
• Army Size Restriction: Limits placed on the size of the Ukrainian armed forces.
• Security Guarantees: The nature and reliability of assurances Ukraine would receive for its future defense.
• US Backstop: The role of the United States in underwriting Ukraine's security.
• European Security Role: The responsibility of European nations in ensuring Ukraine's defense.
• Joint Enforcing Body: The concept of a multinational force to oversee a peace agreement.
• Demilitarized Zone (DMZ): A buffer area along the front line to prevent conflict.
• Peace Observers/Peacekeepers: Personnel to monitor and enforce peace agreements.
• Conflict Freezing: The idea of pausing the active conflict to address broader issues.
• Russian Military Posture: Russia's future military capabilities and intentions in Europe.
• US Leverage: The extent of influence the United States has over parties in a conflict.
• NATO Credibility: The impact of US disengagement on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
• Compromise: The necessity of concessions from both Ukraine and Russia for a lasting peace.

Analysis of Potential Peace Plan Provisions for Ukraine

John Luff, Head of Foreign Policy at the New Eurasian Strategies Center, discusses the complexities and problematic areas of a potential peace plan for Ukraine, drawing on insights from discussions in Geneva and statements from European leaders.

1. Problematic Areas for Ukraine

Luff identifies three primary concerns for Ukraine within the proposed peace framework:

• Territorial Concessions: The most unacceptable aspect for Ukraine is the idea of being forced to give up territory it currently controls. This is seen as a significant loss and a fundamental point of contention.
• Restriction on Army Size: Proposals to limit the size of the Ukrainian army are viewed as detrimental to Ukraine's future ability to defend itself. The fear is that Russia might attack again, and a weakened military would leave Ukraine vulnerable.
• Vague Security Guarantees: There is a significant lack of clarity regarding the nature and reliability of security guarantees Ukraine might receive. Luff's assumption is that these guarantees will be minimal, as Western allies are reluctant to enter into direct conflict with Russia.

2. The Role of Security Guarantees and US Involvement

The discussion highlights the inadequacy of current security guarantee proposals:

• US Reluctance: Luff believes the United States is unlikely to provide meaningful security guarantees, viewing Ukraine's security as primarily a European responsibility. The US perspective is that Europeans need to take the lead, but they often require a US "backstop."
• Proposed US Commitment (Hypothetical): While a hypothetical US commitment to treat an attack on Ukraine as an attack on the US would be "extremely meaningful," there is "no indication so far that the United States is ready to do that."
• Alternative Defense Strategy: Given the lack of robust external guarantees, Luff suggests the solution lies in building up the Ukrainian army to a formidable size and capability to deter Russia independently. This necessitates avoiding restrictions on the army's size.

3. Army Size Negotiations and European Stance

Specific details regarding army size and European perspectives are explored:

• Army Size Figures: Reports suggest a potential increase in the allowed peacetime army size for Ukraine from an initial draft of 600,000 to 800,000.
• German Chancellor's Statement: German Chancellor Frederick Mertz stated that "Ukraine's interests are also Europe's common interests" and that Ukraine "must not be forced to make unilateral territorial concessions" and "must continue to be able to defend itself effectively." This aligns with Luff's view that Ukraine needs strong armed forces and reliable security guarantees.
• European Inaction: Despite statements of support, Luff expresses skepticism about Europe's willingness to provide substantial assistance when push comes to shove.

4. Implementation of Peace Agreements and Challenges

The practicalities of implementing any peace deal present significant hurdles:

• Joint Enforcing Body: The idea of a joint enforcing body, potentially chaired by a figure like President Trump, is deemed highly improbable, as "the Russians won't allow that to happen."
• UN Role: The United Nations is suggested as a possible framework for implementing a peace agreement.
• Peace Monitoring Force: A peace monitoring force will be necessary, likely involving a demilitarized zone around the front line.
• Observer/Peacekeeper Composition: There is "absolutely no clarity" on which countries would contribute to such a force, with questions raised about the potential roles of China, India, or Pakistan.

5. Broader Geopolitical Considerations

The discussion extends to the wider implications of the conflict:

• Conflict Freezing: A key immediate goal might be to "freeze this conflict for a while" to address more complex issues.
• Russian Military Posture: A critical point of negotiation is the lack of any obligations placed on Russia in the draft document regarding its own military posture, while Ukraine's forces are subject to restrictions.
• US Diplomacy and Leverage: Luff contrasts the Russia-Ukraine situation with the Gaza conflict, noting that the US has "leverage over Israel in a way that it doesn't over Russia." President Trump's perceived sympathy for Russia's narrative is also a factor.
• US Internal Divisions: Within the US administration, there appear to be differing views on how to end the war, with figures like JD Vance, the Secretary of State, and National Security Adviser Marco Rubio holding distinct perspectives.
• NATO Credibility: The manner of US disengagement from supporting the war could impact its own authority and the credibility of NATO.

6. The Need for Compromise

Marco Rubio's consistent stance is highlighted:

• Compromise on Both Sides: Rubio has emphasized that "there has to be compromise on both sides in order to reach a sustainable and indeed durable agreement."

Conclusion/Synthesis

The current peace proposals for Ukraine are fraught with significant challenges, primarily concerning territorial integrity, military self-sufficiency, and the lack of credible security guarantees. While European leaders express support for Ukraine's interests, Luff suggests that the ultimate responsibility for defense will likely fall on Ukraine itself, necessitating a strong and unrestricted military. The US appears unwilling to underwrite Ukraine's security directly, viewing it as a European issue, yet Europe's capacity or willingness to do so without US backing is questionable. The implementation of any peace agreement faces immense logistical and political hurdles, with no clear path forward for enforcement or monitoring. The core issue remains the need for genuine compromise from both Russia and Ukraine, a prospect that appears distant given the current dynamics and the lack of clear leverage or commitment from key international actors. The situation is far from a resolution, with much still to be negotiated.