THE recently held summit of the “coalition of the willing,” which reached a consensus to provide forces to Ukraine against Russia, has drawn a strong reaction from President Vladimir Putin, who rejected proposed Western security guarantees for Kyiv and warned that any foreign troops deployed there would be considered legitimate targets by Moscow.
Now in its third year, the Ukraine-Russia war continues to exact immense human and economic costs on both sides, underscoring the urgent need for regional peace and stability. It became clear that both Putin and Trump were seeking a lasting peace agreement rather than a fragile ceasefire. Russia engaged with the United States on an equal footing, countering the narrative of its international isolation. The summit reaffirmed Moscow’s exalted position in the global arena, gaining de facto recognition from President Trump. This marked international acknowledgment of Russia’s genuine security interests, which had long been dismissed by European powers and Ukraine as mere war-mongering or a threat to global order. Ukraine’s persistent pursuit of NATO membership, however, overlooks the profound security repercussions for Moscow. For Russia, this would transform the conflict from an operation to safeguard its sovereignty against Ukraine into a direct and dangerous confrontation with NATO.
NATO alliance would be an existential threat to Moscow, and while Moscow is not afraid of any such coalition however it would ultimately pull the entire global order into disagreement, destruction, and devastation. The blunt refusal of Ukraine’s entry to NATO by President Trump displays Washington’s acknowledgement of these security concerns. Moreover, Russia has highlighted its willingness to accept Ukraine’s entry into the European Union for achieving economic prosperity and stability, thereby underscoring Russian action is attributed to genuine security concerns. While Trump understands Moscow’s demand, Zelensky seems to be inclined towards European powers. A clear signaling has been made by Moscow, questions of collective security and security guarantees sought by European powers and Ukraine cannot come at the expense of Russian sovereignty and security interests. Any attempt to resolve collective security concerns without Russian Federation is nothing short of a utopia.
Moreover, the security guarantees that Ukraine seeks to achieve pertains to large inflow of Western and other advanced military equipment along with defense industrial cooperation with the Ukrainian side. Diplomatic channels further highlight that guarantees may further include deployment inside Ukraine, intelligence cooperation, and increased logistics and training units. The pledge of 26 nations from the Coalition of the Willing to physically deploy troops in Ukraine, makes a mockery of the ongoing process to achieve peace. This would only add fuel to the flame as the troops would become an active target for the Russian Federation.
Additionally, Moscow must keep a close eye on Hungary and Poland’s deep interest in furthering political alliance with Washington, thereby underpinning its potential to be avenues of future NATO support to Ukraine. However, these unusual guarantees would only derail any chances of long lasting peace in the region. Russia must be acknowledged as a superpower which would not allow there to be any threat to its sovereignty. The solution to the conflict lies in addressing the root causes. NATO’s expansionist ambition seems to be the biggest hurdle in achieving a lasting peace. Europe should avoid using Ukraine as a pawn in the greater zero sum game. Peace is contingent upon Europe, and actions of supplying Ukraine with long range missiles to target deep into Russia as announced by Prime Minister Stammer would eventually derail efforts to achieve sustained peace. While Trump is pushing to arrange a meeting between Zelensky and Putin, Moscow’s position remains clear: there can be no meeting for mere showboating. A genuine willingness to end the war must be demonstrated; otherwise, any such meeting would be futile.
The Russian Federation has long advocated for a global security framework based on equality and indivisibility of power. Its Eurasian security framework emphasizes achieving common goals through multilateral cooperation rather than unilateral actions or confrontation. This reflects a paradigm fundamentally oriented toward strategic cooperation and mutual advancement over destruction and detriment. It posits that Russia’s security interests are legitimate and merit international acknowledgment. Moscow’s actions, therefore, are framed as responses to address core security concerns, a perspective that directly challenges the prevailing characterization of Russia as a belligerent state in the international order. This showcases a peace deal should include a commitment that Ukraine could never join NATO, cannot host foreign troops otherwise they become an open target for Russian forces to safeguard their sovereignty and territorial integrity, and handover the territories in Luhansk and Donetsk that Kyiv controls, including the towns of western Donbas formulating a secure buffer zone for Russia for ensuring proper handling of genuine security concerns.
—The writer is Executive Director, the Center for Knowledge and Public Policy.
