Ukraine Now Needs a European Security Guarantee – Not a Peace Operation

At the meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group on 12 February 2025, US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth made the American negotiating position on the Russo-Ukrainian War crystal clear. Europe is scrambling to react.

*****

Ukraine Now Needs a European Security Guarantee – Not a Peace Operation

At the meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group on 12 February 2025, US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth made the American negotiating position on the Russo-Ukrainian War crystal clear. Europe is scrambling to react.

US Announcements about Ukraine

First of all, the US stated that a negotiated settlement will imply cessation of territory. That is hardly surprising: the military reality is that complete liberation of the occupied territories is impossible, unless Russia implodes, of which there is no sign. In late 2022 Ukraine did push back the Russian invaders, but since then both the US and Europe have supplied it with barely enough weapons to hold the line. European leaders are in no position to criticise the US, therefore, because they never matched their rhetoric about supporting Ukraine until total victory with action. Now it is too late.

Not unexpected either, but inviting more justified criticism, is that the US does not see Ukraine joining NATO. In 2008, it was precisely another Republican administration, that of George W. Bush, that forced the decision that Ukraine (and Georgia) would one day become Allies upon the Europeans. The latter were opposed, because they saw Ukraine as a buffer state in between NATO/EU and Russia, not as a member of either organisation. But Europeans gave in to American pressure, and a big strategic mistake was made, giving Putin ample material to fabricate his narrative of encirclement. (Though in reality Putin did not accept the EU view of Ukraine as a buffer either; for him it always was part of a purported Russian sphere of influence).

But the 2022 invasion changed the geopolitics. Ukraine is no longer viable as a buffer state. Unless it is fully incorporated into the Western security architecture, Russia will not rest until it fully dominates the country. That is why the EU accorded Ukraine candidate status. Europe now faces a very difficult choice, therefore.

The European Choice for Ukraine

Hegseth did say that a durable peace requires “robust security guarantees”, but that “capable European and non-European troops” must provide it, ruling out US forces. And he added that “If these troops are deployed as peacekeepers to Ukraine at any point, they should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission. And they should not be covered under Article 5”.

The conclusion is obvious: if there is a settlement, a coalition of European countries must step up and provide a security guarantee to what remains of Ukraine. This coalition must include France and the UK, the two European nuclear powers. It must be clear what this means: if Russia invades a third time, the coalition will declare war. Anything short of that should not be called a security guarantee. The only way to make that credible, is by deploying strong forces in Ukraine – an army corps, with heavy weapons, and full air support.

Those who claim that this is impossible because the border is too long, err. The Ukrainian armed forces will not go home if and when European forces arrive. The Ukrainians will continue to man the first line. Europeans will be deployed behind them, not in between them and the Russians. If Ukraine, with European and American material support, can halt a Russian onslaught, Ukraine and a European coalition together, with dramatically increased European material support, can certainly do so. Everyone should stop talking about a peace operation or peacekeepers, therefore. Peacekeepers are neutral forces deployed in between the formerly warring parties. Europe is not neutral: it is on the side of Ukraine.

What if Putin calls our bluff, and a European coalition finds itself at war with Russia? In fact, NATO cannot stay out, whatever the US says today, for those European states are NATO Allies. Although in this scenario, from a strictly legal perspective, Article 5 does indeed not apply, the strategic reality is that it does. Either the US intervenes on the side of its Allies or the Alliance is dead.

Or: Retrenchment

Nevertheless, many Europeans may find this too risky. But then they must draw the consequences and halt the application for EU membership as well. Continuing the process without offering a security guarantee means that Europe says to Ukraine: if Russia invades again, good luck; but no worries, if you survive, we will pick up the application file again.

It is an option, and the choice is not easy. But if Europeans do not stand by Ukraine, their influence in other candidate countries will suffer immediately. In Moldova, where in October 2024 the referendum on EU accession was only won very narrowly thanks to the vote of the diaspora. If only those Moldovans who live in Moldova had voted, the EU candidacy would have been rejected. And in Georgia, where already today the government in power is moving closer to Russia again. Europe’s entire Eastern flank, including the Caucasus, risks becoming an exclusive Russian sphere of influence, and our connectivity with Central Asia being severed. And this is to say nothing about the impact on Europe’s credibility in other parts of the world.

In Any Case: Europeans Must Defend Europe

Whichever choice they make, one thing is certain: Europeans have to generate the capability to defend Europe. Hegseth confirmed that “The United States remains committed to the NATO alliance and to the defence partnership with Europe. Full stop”. But he also stated that the US wants “our European allies to step into the arena and take ownership of conventional security on the continent”, because “The US is prioritizing deterring war with China in the Pacific”. This is not new: it was the Obama administration that prioritised China. Moreover, this is, in fact, what the NATO New Force Model that is already being rolled out ultimately amounts to.

It has now become very urgent, therefore, to build a complete European “pillar” in NATO. This means that the European Allies must come together and decide which capabilities they will acquire, over and above their existing NATO targets, in those areas in which until now the US contributes the bulk or even all of the capability. Areas such as air defence, deep precision strike, military space and cyber, air transport, command & control, and communications. The aim must be for the forces of all European Allies combined to constitute a complete and coherent conventional force package, capable of deterring or, if deterrence fails, of defending against any conventional attack on Europe.

That will not require spending 5% of GDP on defence – that number has just been conjured up out of thin air. But it does require spending more than Europeans do now.

Conclusion: Great Powers Take Big Decisions

Europe is in a reactive mode, but it need not be. This is a time when big decisions have to be made, which will have long-term impact. If Europeans resolutely pursue their own strategy, starting from their vital interests, and provide a security guarantee to Ukraine, and maintain sanctions against Russia, whatever the US does, they will affirm themselves as one pole of the multipolar world. Indeed, this would signal to China in particular that Europe is serious, and ready to assume the risk of war in defence of its partners – and that China would do well to reduce that risk by putting pressure on Russia.

If Europe abandons Ukraine, or refrains from deciding (which amounts to the same thing), it confirms the view of the sceptics that Europe only works under American leadership. Even if the leader is Donald Trump. Will the European leaders please get together, decide, and act?

Sven Biscop, professor at Ghent University and director of Egmont’s Europe in the World Programme, is the author of This Is Not a New World Order – Europe Rediscovers Geopolitics.

(Photo credits: flags-Image by Beverly Lussier from Pixabay /  Pete Hegseth image from Wikimedia Commons)