War in Ukraine: New Western Security Guarantees?

On 4 September, at the end of a meeting of the “coalition of the willing” held at the Élysée Palace and co-chaired by Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, 26 countries pledged to deploy troops to Ukraine to guarantee the country’s security following a potential ceasefire. What can be taken away from this meeting and what does this commitment mean? What is the current state of diplomatic negotiations regarding the war in Ukraine? An update with Jean de Gliniasty, Senior Research Fellow at IRIS, former French Ambassador to Russia and specialist in Russian affairs.

What are the terms of this commitment by the 26 countries and what does this “reassurance force” entail? How is it perceived by both Kyiv and Moscow?

Security guarantees are, in a way, the Europeans’ “entry ticket” to the negotiation process currently being conducted between the Russians and the Americans. The “coalition of the willing” met in Paris on 4 September with 35 delegations, including numerous heads of state or government (some, like Italy’s Meloni, attending by videoconference). It was co-chaired by British Prime Minister Starmer and French President Macron, with Ukrainian President Zelensky present and an intervention by President Trump via videoconference.

Twenty-six states declared themselves ready to take part in providing security guarantees to Ukraine “on land, at sea and in the air” in the event of a ceasefire or peace agreement. The terms of these security guarantees are currently being discussed among the “willing” states and with the United States. However, President Putin stated clearly on 6 September on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok (which most Western countries attended) that any Europeans deploying troops would become prime targets. The equation is simple: the Russians will not accept forces from NATO member states as security guarantors under a peace agreement, and they still refuse any ceasefire that involves security guarantees provided by states they consider hostile.

Kyiv, on the other hand, insists that Western security guarantees must be at least equivalent to NATO’s Article 5 (automatic solidarity in the event of aggression). In reality, the issue hinges on the outcome of discussions between Russia and the United States.

These European-proposed security guarantees still depend on U.S. support. After much hesitation, in what form does Donald Trump envisage providing support to Ukraine?

With 26 states now on board, this is far from the four or five that had initially signalled their willingness to participate at the first Paris meeting on 27 February. The new commitments stem from the Americans’ declared readiness, confirmed by Trump in Washington before European leaders on 18 August, to take part in these security guarantees.

The details of U.S. participation have not been disclosed, but discussions are ongoing. It is likely that the newly willing states will only define their own roles once they see the scope of U.S. involvement. Trump rules out any ground troop commitment but envisages providing intelligence, potential air support, or supplying equipment — particularly surveillance tools (paid for by Europeans or via Ukrainian compensation, for example in drone technologies).

Trump’s priority for now is to reach an agreement with Moscow, and the “reassurance forces” are not currently his main concern, except insofar as the issue — negotiated bilaterally with Moscow — must take Russian positions into account within any eventual deal.

A bilateral meeting may soon take place between Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin, possibly involving the United States and some European states. As a new phase of negotiations potentially approaches, what is the current balance of power, particularly militarily, between Russia and Ukraine? What could be expected from such a meeting?

Russians say a summit between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky could only take place if it is well prepared — in other words, to crown an agreement already negotiated between the Americans and Ukrainians.

To accommodate Trump, who wants a bilateral summit, they proposed that Zelensky come to Moscow, which was seen as a provocation and led the Ukrainian president to refuse and instead invite Putin to Kyiv. The meeting is not really on the table yet, despite Zelensky’s wishes, Trump’s desire to follow it with a trilateral meeting involving himself, and the Europeans’ preference for a quadrilateral format including them.

Meanwhile, Russian forces continue to nibble away at territory, Ukrainians are defending themselves resolutely, and negotiations are continuing quietly between Russians and Americans. The issues remain the same: the extent of Ukrainian territorial concessions, Ukraine’s neutrality, security guarantees for Kyiv, and the lifting of sanctions — with important economic aspects (such as Exxon’s return to gas exploitation in Sakhalin).

Previous U.S. proposals were rejected by Zelensky (with European backing) as well as by the Russians, who hope to gain more territory. We are still far from implementing security guarantees agreed upon by all parties for Ukraine.