Ukraine: what security guarantees can be effective?
Following redoubled diplomatic efforts to achieve peace at the summits in Alaska and Washington, discussions are now focusing on what form the West's security guarantees for Ukraine could take. Europe's commentators look at who can provide support, and in what form, and whether such measures can deter Russia in the long run.
US planes needed for this to work
Europe on its own can't provide effective security guarantees, The Times stresses:
“Mr Zelensky has stated 200,000 soldiers would be required to deter another Russian invasion, but European leaders have said that mustering a force of 10,000 would be a struggle. Europe has no real strategy or ability to protect Ukraine. ... It has no choice but to look across the Atlantic. ... It may be that US planes, based in the region if not directly in Ukraine, along with European soldiers on the ground could form a viable solution.”
German soldiers a must
Peace in Ukraine will require a German military presence too, writes Die Zeit:
“One option would be the model favoured by French President Emmanuel Macron: so-called 'reassurance forces' that would train and support the Ukrainian army but be deployed away from the front line, which would then be frozen. In the first instance, it would be a symbolic presence of the West that would deter Putin, because he would know: if he considers any new invasions he runs the risk of having to fight against soldiers from Nato countries. ... In France, Macron has long since begun to explain to his compatriots why such a mission makes sense. ... It's high time the German government also came up with ideas and communicated them.”
The Kremlin won't take this seriously
The security guarantees under discussion offer too little protection for Ukraine, Avvenire criticises:
“The manner in which all this is being discussed means one thing in particular: no Nato membership for Ukraine. ... It's said that these 'guarantees' which Volodymyr Zelensky is quite rightly demanding, given that he has committed his country to defending European security, will be very similar to any that Nato could offer. But that won't make any impression on the Kremlin, because it's nothing new. Already during the presidency of Petro Poroshenko (2014-2019), the Ukrainian armed forces were strengthened and above all restructured to be interoperable with Nato forces.”
Trump's goodwill was bought by Europe
Kronen Zeitung points out that the US is receiving financial recompense for participating in the security guarantees:
“In concrete terms, the US now wants to be involved in providing security guarantees for Ukraine once the war ends. ... The Western states plan to discuss what form these guarantees should take over the next ten days. There has been no opposition from Russia so far. The more powerful the security guarantees are, the easier it will be to persuade Ukraine to make painful concessions. Incidentally, however: Ukraine and Europe bought US participation in the security guarantees with a 100-billion-dollar arms deal which is financed by Europe.”
First the weapons must be silenced
TVNet asks whether a new security architecture is really on the cards:
“It should not be forgotten that as long as the fighting continues, security guarantees remain a hypothetical construct. For guarantees to take effect at all, a path to a ceasefire, or at least a clear cessation of hostilities must be found. The biggest question in any three-way talks between Ukraine, Russia and Western allies right now is whether it is even possible to provide a sufficiently stable foundation for a new security architecture. If not, all talk of a European 'foundation' and an American 'roof' will be just words on paper.”
Worthless promises
Polityka asks what new security guarantees can be worth without a significant military presence:
“The fact is that Ukraine has already received such guarantees from both Europe and the US in the past, but they turned out to be not worth the paper they were written on. The Budapest Memorandum of 1994 guaranteed the inviolability of Ukraine's borders in exchange for Kyiv renouncing its nuclear weapons. Not only the US, but also Britain and Russia made this promise. But Moscow trampled on it.”