The future of Ukraine’s security is increasingly tied to the United States, even as European nations strive to bolster support for Kyiv, according to recent statements and analyses. Despite a surge in European efforts – including a 34-nation “coalition of the willing” announced in March 2025 by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron, and a commitment from 26 countries to deploy troops “the day after the ceasefire or peace” – the fundamental power to secure a lasting peace for Ukraine rests with Washington.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy underscored the critical need for credible security guarantees during a address to the European Parliament. He emphasized that preventing further Russian aggression requires more than just European solidarity. Zelenskyy warned that without a clear timeline for EU membership and robust guarantees, Russian President Vladimir Putin will exploit divisions to indefinitely obstruct Ukraine’s progress.
Zelenskyy directly accused Putin of being “mentally unstable” and posing an aggressive threat not only to Ukraine but to the broader European security landscape. He argued that Putin’s core motivation stems from an inability to accept the possibility of differing lifestyles and freedoms beyond Russia’s borders. This assessment highlights the deeply entrenched ideological conflict underpinning the war and the challenges in reaching a sustainable resolution.
The reliance on U.S. Guarantees stems, in part, from a historical distrust rooted in the Budapest Memorandum. This agreement, signed by the U.S., Russia, and the U.K., provided security assurances to Ukraine in exchange for relinquishing its Soviet-era nuclear weapons. The perceived failure of these guarantees to prevent Russia’s subsequent aggression casts a long shadow over current negotiations, making Ukraine understandably hesitant to rely solely on promises.
The European Parliament, in a resolution following Zelenskyy’s address, echoed the call for strong security guarantees. The resolution explicitly stated that Ukraine’s future lies within the European Union and recommended accelerating its integration into the single market. It also urged the EU and its member states to increase military, political, and diplomatic support for Ukraine.
However, the resolution acknowledged a practical limitation: Europe’s ability to act independently is constrained by its reliance on the United States for logistical support. This dependence underscores the reality that even a European-led enforcement of a peace agreement would likely require U.S. Backing to be effective.
The situation is further complicated by concerns regarding a potential shift in U.S. Policy. Reports suggest that Washington is increasingly focused on achieving a “strategic stability” with Russia, potentially at the expense of a comprehensive and just peace for Ukraine. This perceived prioritization of short-term agreements over long-term security has raised anxieties in Kyiv and among European allies.
Zelenskyy also called for intensified sanctions against Russia, specifically targeting its energy sector, financial institutions, and individuals involved in war crimes. He urged the EU to eliminate its dependence on Russian energy, exclude Russian banks from European financial systems, and crack down on sanctions evasion. He specifically named the Wagner Group and its successor entities as deserving of terrorist designation.
The European Parliament’s resolution supports these calls for stronger sanctions and a continued decoupling from Russian energy. It also condemns the deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia and supports international efforts to secure their return. The resolution further calls for expanding sanctions to include individuals responsible for war crimes and strengthening enforcement mechanisms to prevent sanctions circumvention.
Looking ahead, the Parliament envisions a future peace agreement supported by security guarantees comparable to Article 5 of the NATO treaty and Article 42, paragraph 7, of the Treaty on European Union. Such guarantees would need to adhere to international law, ensure accountability for past actions, include provisions for reparations, and uphold Ukraine’s right to self-defense and its freedom to choose its own alliances.
The debate surrounding security guarantees highlights a fundamental tension: Ukraine’s desire for robust protection against future aggression versus the complexities of securing commitments from both the U.S. And Europe. While European nations are actively seeking to play a larger role in ensuring Ukraine’s security, the reality remains that the ultimate outcome will likely depend on the willingness of the United States to provide long-term, credible guarantees.
