Ukraine without security guarantees: why Trump doesn't offer an alternative to NATO.
In an interview aired on the evening of January 2 during a telethon, Vladimir Zelensky highlighted the crucial role of the United States in ensuring security guarantees for Ukraine.
Specifically, while discussing that a just peace requires "strong, powerful security guarantees," the head of state summarized: "We are fighting for this (Ukraine's NATO membership — ed.), and we will continue to fight. I wouldn't want to speculate about alternatives, but undoubtedly, any security guarantees without the U.S. are weak guarantees for Ukraine." As an example, the president cited Israel, which is not a NATO member but has security guarantees from the U.S. and other countries that have helped it repel attacks from Iranian drones and missiles.
"There are many details regarding these security guarantees, but no one has offered such guarantees to Ukraine yet," Zelensky emphasized, stating that security guarantees are one of the components of "a strong position for Ukraine, from which it can engage in any negotiations with Russia."
Moreover, Vladimir Zelensky stated that the elected U.S. President Donald Trump could play a potentially key role in ending the war: "Trump has the ability to be decisive in this war. He can stop Putin, or more accurately, help us stop Putin. He can do it. I believe he is strong and unpredictable. And I would like Trump's unpredictability to primarily concern Russia. I believe he truly wants to end the war."
Under What Conditions Trump Can Open a Window of Opportunities for Peace
Emphasizing that indeed, any security guarantees for Ukraine without U.S. involvement will not be effective, the expert added: "One way or another, the entire West looks to the position of the United States. And even if U.S. participation is minimal, it must be there; otherwise, it will not be perceived as a project of the entire West, and thus it will not be effective."
At this stage, Petr Oleschuk predicts that Trump's position on the security formula for Ukraine is unlikely to change, as the future U.S. president's entourage "constantly whispers in his ear," suggesting that Russia is quite normal and that it was merely Biden who provoked Putin by wanting to draw Ukraine into NATO. "In other words, Trump keeps hearing the 'song' that if Ukraine is not admitted to NATO, then the Russians will not attack anymore, because they will have no problems. This, to put it mildly, distorted idea is very popular and is constantly echoed by Musk and other representatives of Trump's team. In this situation, expecting the old-new U.S. president to make any qualitatively breakthrough decisions regarding Ukraine and NATO or other security guarantees is unrealistic. Unfortunately, the Russians have managed to impose on the West the idea that closed doors for Ukraine in NATO are their quite legitimate demand."
Commenting on Trump's potential role in ending the war, Petr Oleschuk noted: "Zelensky's words about Trump’s decisive role in the Russian-Ukrainian war hint that Trump's unpredictability could be utilized in more, shall we say, progressive and beneficial directions for peace than it has been in the past. What does this mean? The main problem for Biden and his administration was that they were highly predictable, and Putin understood this perfectly, knowing 99% how they would react to any given situation. In this sense, Trump's unpredictability provides an opportunity to bluff, pressure Putin, and so on. But this window of opportunity will open when Trump is genuinely interested in this. So far, I do not see any particular interest from his side."
The Israeli Model of Security Guarantees for Ukraine
According to the political scientist, the third option is currently the only alternative, "given the impossibility of Ukraine joining NATO." "Such a signal was sent to allies in Zelensky's interview during the telethon, as the deployment of a European peacekeeping contingent seems like a fantastic idea. Overall, the question is how willing European countries and the U.S. are to invest in Ukraine's security in the future at institutional and contractual levels, which should involve not just ephemeral commitments, but rather concrete measures similar to Article 5 of the NATO treaty. It is crucial that this hypothetical Israeli model of security for Ukraine does not become a repetition of the Budapest Memorandum or the 2024 security agreements, which contain only general statements, even though they represent a certain diplomatic success for Ukraine," emphasized Oleg Posternak.
Assessing Trump's potential role in achieving peace, the political scientist noted that the Russian-Ukrainian war is not actually a key issue for the newly elected U.S. president. According to the expert, Donald Trump wants to extract the "maximum PR effect" from this case. Based on this, Oleg Posternak states that expectations that "Trump will come — restore order and bring peace" are valid, relevant, but not entirely ideal. In this context, much will depend on the results of the upcoming visit to Kyiv by Trump's special representative for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg.