Security guarantees from the United States remain the only viable path to peace for Ukraine, despite the desire of European allies to offer alternative models. Politico writes that without logistical support from Washington, European countries are not even able to independently deploy multinational forces.
The publication notes that, against the backdrop of the failure of the Budapest Memorandum, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is forced to take into account a number of fundamental points in the current negotiations. In particular, Kyiv is ready to consider abandoning its aspirations for NATO membership in exchange for reliable and effective security guarantees.
According to Politico, among the possible elements of such guarantees is the supply of Tomahawk cruise missiles with a range of up to 1,000 kilometers to Ukraine. This would allow strikes on Russian political and military centers and potentially deter the Kremlin from resuming active hostilities.
Particular emphasis is placed on the legal status of possible agreements. Unlike the Budapest Memorandum, which was a political agreement of the executive branch, the current guarantees, according to Kyiv's expectations, should be legally binding. This involves ratification by the US House of Representatives and Senate and subsequent approval by the president. In this case, the obligations towards Ukraine could be equated with the US bilateral security treaties with Japan and South Korea.
Politico notes that formal ratification would give Ukraine additional opportunities to influence Congress and would help maintain stable bipartisan support in the United States.
At the same time, the publication emphasizes that even such a scenario is not without risks. In particular, it recalls Donald Trump's statement on the way to the NATO summit in The Hague that "there are many definitions of Article 5." This article of the Alliance was deliberately formulated in such a way as to avoid automatically drawing the United States into a major war in Europe.
Against this background, Politico doubts that Washington would agree to guarantees that would oblige it to directly intervene militarily in Ukraine. Especially considering that since 2022, the US has effectively blocked Ukraine's path to NATO membership and has made it a priority to avoid direct participation in the war.
Additional uncertainty is created by parallel contacts between the US and Russia, which are ongoing simultaneously with the European and Ukrainian negotiations. The publication emphasizes that Vladimir Putin's position will in any case remain key.
Moscow, according to Politico, seeks a much broader agreement with the United States on the entire European security system, as demonstrated by its initial 28-point “peace plan.” At the same time, Putin has shown no willingness to abandon his maximalist demands, which is why it is still unclear what compromises Russia can make.
In conclusion, the publication notes that no matter how strong American security guarantees for Ukraine appear, their real effectiveness may depend not only on legal wording in the United States, but also on how Moscow interprets these guarantees.
