They had security guarantees. They actually need enough support to kick Russia out based on existing agreements. Enforcement of those seems like a better way than creating new ones.
anders_hansson on
>If the issue of Ukraine’s membership in NATO is no longer on the agenda,
Even if there was a chance that Ukraine would get a NATO membership (and let’s be real, that chance was pretty slim), alternate security guarantees for Ukraine should have been worked out long ago. Already in March 2022 Zelensky acknowledged that Ukraine wasn’t likely going to join NATO, but back then we didn’t support giving Ukraine any security guarantees.
>the European Union (EU) is obliged to offer Ukraine real security guarantees, said Kaja Kallas,
Maybe “obliged” isn’t the right word, but we sure should do it. I don’t understand what has taken Europe so long to come to this realization.
happytoad on
There can be no “security guarantee” vs major nuclear power.
“Security guarantees” for a small country would imply that another major nuclear power places the lives and safety of its own citizens on the same level as the lives and safety of the citizens of that small country. And that won’t happen, period.
The only real “guarantee” for any smaller states is to pursue a foreign policy that does not create threats to neighboring major powers. It’s not absolute but it’s quite effective, in current drone-warfare era even “limited military operation” turns out quite costly for the perpetrator. You have to really go out of your way to make large country start a full-scale war against you.
Only absolute deterrent would be nuclear weapons but should you try to actually get them, all of the major political powers, despite all their differences, will make substantial joint efforts to prevent you from actually acquiring such weapon.
Kageru on
…. Security guarantees for what peace? The only peace plan I have seen recently is the Surrender documents drafted by Russia and presented by the US as their own work. Ukraine is not that desperate at this point, especially if their remaining allies support them.
darkestblackduck on
Why? Ukraine is more Russian than it is European. It’s not Europeans problem. EU should and will help if Ukraine asks and needs it but that is a negotiation not an obligation.
vit-kievit on
Oh wow. Again?
Odd-Professor-5309 on
What would a ‘security guarantee’ actually mean in reality ?
The EU and NATO have not entered Ukraine to defend against Russia.
Will the ‘security guarantee’ bring EU boots on the ground in Ukraine if Russia invades in the future.
If so, why not now. What will have changed ?
Particular-County277 on
I fear Putin will start another special military operation days after this peace deal is settled. I don’t know that he can let go of any of it. I don’t want to be pessimistic, but TFG
taoyx on
The safest would be to send EU troops to Ukraine either as peacekeepers if Putin calms down or to calm down Putin if he would not. As long as Trump is in charge, NATO has no future anyways, it’s for EU to handle its own defense. Probably the US military industrial complex won’t like it, but they need to discuss it with Trump, not EU.
spilvippe on
NATO is destroyed by Trump.
No need to mention NATO anymore…Europe should pray that US doesn’t send weapons to Russia, in the near future.
EU needs to offer nuke umbrella to Ukraine..and speeds up its own re-arming…
G5 IS ABOUT TO KNOCK ON EU’S DOOR
EmpEli220 on
The interesting part isn’t just the guarantees themselves, but what form they take. If NATO membership is politically blocked, bilateral security pacts or EU/Western commitments might be the fallback which could reshape European security cooperation long term
13 Comments
Errr, No?
They had security guarantees. They actually need enough support to kick Russia out based on existing agreements. Enforcement of those seems like a better way than creating new ones.
>If the issue of Ukraine’s membership in NATO is no longer on the agenda,
Even if there was a chance that Ukraine would get a NATO membership (and let’s be real, that chance was pretty slim), alternate security guarantees for Ukraine should have been worked out long ago. Already in March 2022 Zelensky acknowledged that Ukraine wasn’t likely going to join NATO, but back then we didn’t support giving Ukraine any security guarantees.
>the European Union (EU) is obliged to offer Ukraine real security guarantees, said Kaja Kallas,
Maybe “obliged” isn’t the right word, but we sure should do it. I don’t understand what has taken Europe so long to come to this realization.
There can be no “security guarantee” vs major nuclear power.
“Security guarantees” for a small country would imply that another major nuclear power places the lives and safety of its own citizens on the same level as the lives and safety of the citizens of that small country. And that won’t happen, period.
The only real “guarantee” for any smaller states is to pursue a foreign policy that does not create threats to neighboring major powers. It’s not absolute but it’s quite effective, in current drone-warfare era even “limited military operation” turns out quite costly for the perpetrator. You have to really go out of your way to make large country start a full-scale war against you.
Only absolute deterrent would be nuclear weapons but should you try to actually get them, all of the major political powers, despite all their differences, will make substantial joint efforts to prevent you from actually acquiring such weapon.
…. Security guarantees for what peace? The only peace plan I have seen recently is the Surrender documents drafted by Russia and presented by the US as their own work. Ukraine is not that desperate at this point, especially if their remaining allies support them.
Why? Ukraine is more Russian than it is European. It’s not Europeans problem. EU should and will help if Ukraine asks and needs it but that is a negotiation not an obligation.
Oh wow. Again?
What would a ‘security guarantee’ actually mean in reality ?
The EU and NATO have not entered Ukraine to defend against Russia.
Will the ‘security guarantee’ bring EU boots on the ground in Ukraine if Russia invades in the future.
If so, why not now. What will have changed ?
I fear Putin will start another special military operation days after this peace deal is settled. I don’t know that he can let go of any of it. I don’t want to be pessimistic, but TFG
The safest would be to send EU troops to Ukraine either as peacekeepers if Putin calms down or to calm down Putin if he would not. As long as Trump is in charge, NATO has no future anyways, it’s for EU to handle its own defense. Probably the US military industrial complex won’t like it, but they need to discuss it with Trump, not EU.
NATO is destroyed by Trump.
No need to mention NATO anymore…Europe should pray that US doesn’t send weapons to Russia, in the near future.
EU needs to offer nuke umbrella to Ukraine..and speeds up its own re-arming…
G5 IS ABOUT TO KNOCK ON EU’S DOOR
The interesting part isn’t just the guarantees themselves, but what form they take. If NATO membership is politically blocked, bilateral security pacts or EU/Western commitments might be the fallback which could reshape European security cooperation long term
The same speech every week