Security Guarantees at the Center of Negotiations
The United States has proposed long term security guarantees for Ukraine as part of an ongoing peace initiative aimed at ending the war with Russia. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed that Washington is offering commitments covering a period of fifteen years, though he made clear that Kyiv would prefer guarantees lasting several decades. In his view, only a long horizon of protection can truly deter future attempts by Moscow to use force to seize Ukrainian territory.
Zelenskyy stressed that without firm security guarantees, any peace arrangement would be fragile and unlikely to endure. He argued that past experience shows Russia has repeatedly violated agreements when deterrence was weak. For Ukraine, the guarantees are not only about ending current hostilities but about preventing the return of war once international attention fades.
While the precise details of the guarantees have not been disclosed, Zelenskyy indicated that they would include mechanisms to monitor a settlement and some form of international presence. He did not elaborate on what that presence might look like, but Russia has already stated it would reject the deployment of troops from NATO countries on Ukrainian soil, highlighting a key obstacle in the talks.
Diplomatic Momentum and Unresolved Disputes
The proposed guarantees come as diplomatic activity intensifies, with the American president Donald Trump publicly expressing optimism that Ukraine and Russia are closer to a peace agreement than at any previous point. Trump recently hosted Zelenskyy and has also held direct conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin as part of a broader effort to broker a settlement.
Despite this momentum, negotiators remain divided on several critical issues. Among them are questions about which forces would withdraw from which areas, and the future of the Russian occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, one of the largest facilities of its kind in the world. Trump has acknowledged that the talks remain fragile and could still collapse if these thorny matters cannot be resolved.
Russian officials have signaled that Moscow wants a comprehensive peace deal rather than a temporary ceasefire. Putin has insisted that a full settlement must be agreed before any pause in fighting, arguing that a truce without resolution would only give Ukraine time to regroup militarily. This stance contrasts sharply with Kyiv’s position, which sees interim security measures as essential to building trust.
Claims, Counterclaims, and Military Pressure
Tensions surrounding the negotiations have been compounded by conflicting claims of military actions. Russian officials alleged that Ukraine attempted to strike a residence linked to Putin using long range drones, warning that such actions would provoke a serious response and could influence Moscow’s negotiating posture. Zelenskyy firmly denied the accusation, calling it another attempt to manipulate the peace process and undermine progress.
At the same time, Putin has sought to portray Russia as negotiating from a position of strength. He has claimed that Russian forces are advancing in eastern and southern regions of Ukraine and emphasized the need to establish buffer zones along Russia’s borders to ensure its security. These statements underline the gap between diplomatic rhetoric and realities on the battlefield.
European leaders are also moving to shape the outcome. Emmanuel Macron announced that Ukraine’s allies would meet in Paris to coordinate their concrete contributions to the proposed security guarantees. According to Zelenskyy, any long term guarantees would require approval not only from the US Congress but also from the parliaments of other participating countries, adding layers of political complexity.
Ukrainian Public Skepticism and the Road Ahead
Inside Ukraine, public reaction to the negotiations has been cautious and often skeptical. Many Ukrainians question Putin’s sincerity, pointing to years of broken promises and continued aggression. Veterans and civilians alike express doubts that Russia can be trusted to honor any agreement without strong enforcement mechanisms.
Zelenskyy has said he wants the peace plan under discussion to be approved by Ukrainians through a national referendum. However, holding such a vote would require a sustained ceasefire, something Moscow has shown little willingness to accept without a finalized settlement. This creates a political dilemma, as public approval is seen as vital to the legitimacy of any deal.
Political analysts note that Zelenskyy’s ability to build a working relationship with Trump is a positive sign, but they caution that no binding decisions have yet been adopted or signed. For now, the peace process remains defined by cautious optimism, deep mistrust, and unresolved disputes that continue to shape the future of European security.
