Washington: As the push for a settlement to the Russia-Ukraine war intensifies, Western and European allies are locked in difficult talks over what kind of security guarantees could ensure Kyiv’s long-term protection and what role the US and NATO might play in enforcing them. While there is consensus that Ukraine will need credible assurances before signing any peace deal, divisions remain over whether those guarantees should involve direct military deployments, air defense commitments, or financial and weapons packages modeled on other security arrangements.

According to Anadolu Agency, analysts say the stakes are high: unless Ukraine is convinced it has a reliable shield against future Russian aggression, no political agreement will hold. For Moscow, experts believe any kind of agreement for Western troops on the ground or a NATO-like defense pact would be clear red lines. Lucian Kim, a senior analyst on Ukraine at the International Crisis Group, noted that while Ukraine would prefer sweeping foreign security commitments, it also understands that ‘the idea of boots on the ground or some kind of automatic intervention’ is highly unlikely.

Ukraine and its European partners have pressed for a ceasefire paired with binding security assurances before entering any settlement with Moscow. Talks in Washington between US President Donald Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and European leaders explored ways of offering guarantees similar to NATO’s collective defense principle. NATO chief Mark Rutte confirmed that a group of 30 countries, led by the UK and France, and including Japan and Australia, is drafting a framework for long-term security commitments.

Analysts suggest strengthening Ukraine’s military capacity is the most realistic guarantee since NATO membership is off the agenda. Daria Malling, a policy advisor on Ukraine at the Center for Liberal Modernity in Berlin, emphasized the importance of strong military support to the Ukrainian army alongside tightening sanctions. Zelenskyy has proposed purchasing $90 billion worth of American weapons as part of Kyiv’s security demands.

Timothy Ash, an associate fellow in the Russia and Eurasia program at Chatham House, suggested an ‘Israel model’ could be applied, guaranteeing Ukraine access to Western military hardware. He believes Ukraine is likely to secure access to the full spectrum of Western weapons, including fighter jets like the F-16 and F-35.

While Kyiv has pushed for international deployments, analysts remain cautious about whether European states would risk sending soldiers into Ukraine. Malling mentioned that arms supplies and monitoring missions are under discussion. Despite repeated refusals to deploy US troops, Trump confirmed that air support remains a consideration. The potential involvement of European troops near the front lines with US air support is being debated.

Air defense initiatives are also under discussion, with European countries expected to contribute alongside Washington. Malling highlighted the potential efficiency of a sky shield over Ukraine, while Hess noted a shift in European readiness to provide a reassurance force. However, Ash cautioned about the limited capability of European powers to sustain operations without US support.

Comparisons have been made to NATO’s Article 5, though some question its real value. Malling warned that declarative guarantees risk repeating the failures of past assurances like the Budapest Memorandum. Analysts recalled Ukraine’s troubled history with such assurances, citing Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 despite security guarantees.