Security guarantees for Ukraine – what does that actually mean?

At the summit between US President Donald Trump and the heads of Europe in Washington, there were a number of appointments, for example for a possible two-meeting between Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin and the Ukrainian President Wolodymyr Selenskyj. The elaboration of specific security guarantees for Ukraine was also discussed.

“Our partners will probably decide on the security guarantees, and there will be more and more details,” said Selenskyj. It is important that the United States participates in security guarantees for Ukraine. These plans would be “formalized” in seven to ten days.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) praised the willingness of the United States to give security guarantees and to coordinate them with Europe. But: What is it actually, a security guarantee? And what could it look like for Ukraine? Answers to the most important questions:

“Security guarantee means that in the event that Russia does not adhere to a peace agreement with Ukraine. And you have to calculate that after Russia has attacked Ukraine without any need and without any motivation,” said Foreign Minister Johann WadePhul (CDU). “This means that you then make political and military support.” On Deutschlandfunk he said that ultimately security guarantees would simply mean that you are not only with words, but also with deeds on the side of Ukraine.

Specifically, security guarantees therefore include measures that (renewed) attacks on a state should prevent – in this case Ukraine. For example, counting weapons deliveries, stationing of troops, admission to military and defense allies, assisting assistance in the event of war, armaments control, demilitarization or embargos or sanctions. The goal is a deterrent to secure peace or ceasefire.

Ukraine has had bad experiences with agreements in the past. Neither that in which the United States, Russia and the United Kingdom of Ukraine in return for the submission of its nuclear weapons made security commitments, the Minsk Peace Agreement of 2015 was able to prevent Russia from annexing the Crimea in 2014 and invading Ukraine in 2022. Selenskyj therefore already demanded “concrete guarantees” instead of mere declarations of intent.

This is currently being worked out, but there are several measures in discussion. European states hope for guarantees that are similar to the NATO support pact. Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty states that an attack on a member state is considered an attack on everyone. This could mean that foreign troops intervene in a Russian attack on Ukraine.

France and Great Britain have long been discussing European peacekeepers for Ukraine, which are intended to secure a ceasefire. Merz left open whether Germany participates. The opposition must also be spoken to about the Bundeswehr participation – because the Bundestag has to vote on it, as WadePhul emphasized.

Trump explained that the United States would not send troops, but could provide other support, for example out of the air. He assumes that Germany, France and Great Britain are willing to send soldiers to Ukraine, he said in an interview with the US broadcaster Fox News. He only assured the Ukrainians the day before: “We will give you very good protection, very good security.”

According to the current status, this has moved far away. Vladimir Putin rejects NATO accession to Ukraine, as well as Donald Trump. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte also emphasized in an interview with the broadcaster Fox News that it was about security guarantees, not a membership.

Wolfgang Ischinger, former head of the Munich Security Conference, commented in star However, critical of NATO-like security guarantees: “Everything that is only on paper is worth nothing.” Rather, Ukraine needs the “most modern, largest and strongest army Europe” so that nobody is doing it. “This is essentially the replacement strategy for the non-realizable NATO membership. The United States would also have to contribute to this. In two or four years, we have a new attempt to attack Putin in two or four years to realize the political subjugation of Ukraine.”

Ischinger warned in starGuarantees would have to be underpinned by concrete military presence and equipment. However, stationing foreign troops in Ukraine is problematic. “Which European countries would be willing and able to send troops to Ukraine? Under what conditions, Russia would get involved as part of a ceasefire agreement? From the Russian perspective, this would be almost synonymous with the presence of NATO troops.” And NATO soldiers on Ukrainian soil are a red line for Moscow.

Other experts see the sticking point here. “The assistance pact also includes securing a possible ceasefire-and the protection is only possible with ground troops,” said CDU foreign politician Roderich Kiesewetter on Monday on Bavarian Radio. He also commented in a similar way to Ischinger: “If the guarantees are not guaranteed, they are not worth the paper on which they stand.”

That is still the question. Merz said this question had to be discussed between the European partners and the US government. “It is completely clear that all of Europe should participate.” Germany has “a high level of responsibility” to do this. When asked whether the Bundeswehr could also participate, Merz replied that it was too early to give a final answer.