Later today U.S. President Donald Trump will meet the (former) Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenski to talk about the results of last week's summit between Trump and Russia's President Vladimir Putin. As a result of that summit both sides declared that the war in Ukraine must be ended with an all-encompassing peace agreement. That again will require for Ukraine to give up on certain territories and to become a neutral country.
Zelenski will try to induce Trump to return to his previous position. Trump had earlier demanded an immediate ceasefire from Russia at the current frontline. But after trying he had found that he had no way to achieving that. Trump had to agree to Russia positions because there was no other way left to end the war in Ukraine.
Trump is notoriously prone to change his position from one talk to another. This time however I believe that he will stick to his agreement with Putin.
Zelenski will be told to file for peace with Russia under whatever condition Russia will demand from him.
After the talk with Zelenski Trump will have a meet and greet with a bunch of European premiers, chancellors and presidents. They want the war to continue which requires to keep the U.S. involved in it.
Their main talking point and request will be a 'security guarantee' for Ukraine which, they say, will require U.S. involvement and backing.
Being asked about it during an interview Trump's Russia envoy Stephen Witkoff gave a polite response:
“The United States is potentially prepared to be able to give Article 5 security guarantees, but not from NATO — directly from the United States and other European countries,” Witkoff said in a “Fox News Sunday” interview.
The meaning of "is … potentially … prepared … to be able … " in this context must be translated into "No way that's gonna happen!"
Two years ago I had already discussed the question of security guarantees for Ukraine:
The Ukraine is now obviously losing the war. It will soon need to sign a capitulation like ceasefire agreement with Russia.
But who or what can guarantee that any such agreement will be held up?
NATO membership is no longer an option.
…
A direct full security guarantee from Washington to Kiev is also impossible. It would create a high likelihood of a direct war between the U.S. and Russia which would soon become nuclear. The U.S. will not want to risk that.
…
Russia's might makes even an attempt of an Israel like security guarantee for Ukraine too costly for the U.S. and thereby simply impossible.There is only one country in the world that can guarantee peace in Ukraine and the security of its borders. That country is Russia!
But any such guarantee will of course come with conditions attached to it. Either Ukraine will accept those or it will never be secure from outer interference.
That is simply a fact of life Ukraine has had to, and will have to live with.
Alastair Crooke suggests (video) that the peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine will follow the outline of the Istanbul Agreement negotiated in March 2022 between Ukraine and Russia. Ukraine, under pressure from the West, had at that time refrained from signing it.
The Istanbul Agreement did include security guarantees (emphasis added):
The agreement assumes:
…
2. Possible guarantor states: Great Britain, China, Russia, the United States, France, Turkey, Germany, Canada, Italy, Poland, Israel. The free accession of other states to the treaty is proposed, in particular the Russian Federation proposes Belarus.
…
4. Ukraine does not join any military alliances, does not deploy foreign military bases and contingents, and conducts international military exercises only with the consent of the guarantor states. For their part, the guarantor states confirm their intention to promote Ukraine’s membership in the European Union.5. The guarantor states and Ukraine agree that in the event of aggression, any armed attack on Ukraine or any military operation against Ukraine, each of the Guarantor States, after urgent and immediate consultations between them (which shall be held within no more than three days), in the exercise of the right to individual or collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will provide (in response to and on the basis of an official request from Ukraine) assistance to Ukraine, as a permanently neutral state under attack, by immediately taking such individual or joint action as may be necessary, including closing airspace over Ukraine, providing necessary weapons, using armed force in order to restore and subsequently maintain the security of Ukraine as a permanently neutral state.
Any such armed attack (any military operation) and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall cease when the Security Council takes the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
The mechanism for implementing security guarantees for Ukraine, based on the results of additional consultations between Ukraine and the Guarantor States, will be regulated in the Treaty, taking into account protection from possible provocations.
Again:
… such guarantee will of course come with conditions attached to it. Either Ukraine will accept those or it will never be secure from outer interference.
So yes, the Ukraine can have 'security guarantees'. But the conditions of those will be set by the main guarantor – which has to be Russia.
Trump seems to have understood that. How long will it take those European 'leaders' to get it?