As the Trump administration pushes for an immediate end to the war, the focus has shifted to what Ukraine gets in return for potential concessions. The centerpiece of the U.S. proposal is a set of “legally binding” security guarantees that President Zelensky says must be approved by the U.S. Congress. These guarantees are described as “mirroring Article 5” of the NATO treaty, essentially promising that an attack on Ukraine would be treated as an attack on the United States.
While these guarantees sound robust, they come with significant strings attached. The U.S. plan reportedly requires Ukraine to drop its bid for NATO membership—a long-standing “red line” for Russia. Additionally, the plan calls for a cap on the size of the Ukrainian military at roughly 600,000 to 800,000 personnel. For many in Kyiv, this feels like a forced disarmament in exchange for promises that may or may not be kept by future U.S. administrations.
The European response to this framework has been mixed. While leaders in Berlin, Paris, and London have voiced support for a “just and lasting peace,” they have also discussed the possibility of a “coalition of the willing” to send European troops to monitor a ceasefire inside Ukraine. This European-led force would be tasked with securing Ukraine’s skies and seas, providing a tangible deterrent that doesn’t rely solely on Washington’s political whims.
Despite these elaborate security arrangements, the territorial issue remains the “elephant in the room.” Russia has categorically rejected any plan that includes Western security guarantees for Ukraine, viewing them as a “threat to Moscow’s security.” The Kremlin’s insistence on a “neutral” and “demilitarized” Ukraine stands in direct opposition to the “fortress Ukraine” model being proposed by the Trump team and their European partners.
The Miami talks this weekend will likely center on these conflicting visions of security. If the U.S. can convince Russia to accept a neutral but well-defended Ukraine, a deal might be possible. However, if Putin views any U.S. security guarantee as a backdoor to NATO expansion, the peace process may stall before it even reaches the implementation phase.