Nato-like protection in focus for Trump meeting with Ukraine, Europe
straitstimes.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 6:57:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, U.S.–NATO Relations
WASHINGTON - US President Donald Trump could offer Nato-like protection of Ukraine, and Russia is open to the idea, one of his top foreign policy officials said on Aug 17 ahead of a meeting with Ukraine and European leaders to hammer out details of possible security guarantees for Kyiv.
"We were able to win the following concession, that the United States could offer Article 5-like protection," Mr Steve Witkoff, Mr Trump's special envoy to Russia, told CNN's State of the Union programme. "The United States could offer Article 5 protection, which was the first time we had ever heard the Russians agree to that."
Mr Witkoff was referring to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which regards any attack against one of its 32 members as an attack on all. He suggested that a security guarantee of that scale could be offered to Ukraine in lieu of Nato membership, which Mr Putin has ruled out.
Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and has been gradually advancing for months in the deadliest war in Europe for 80 years.
Mr Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who were both in the room when Mr Trump
met Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Alaska
on Aug 15, gave a series of TV interviews ahead of a Aug 18 meeting in Washington with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and leaders of some European allies.
"We made some progress, we believe, and now we have to follow up on that progress," Mr Rubio told CNN's State of the Union about the meeting with Mr Putin. "Ultimately, where this should lead is to a meeting between the three leaders, between Mr Zelensky, Mr Putin and President Trump, where we can finalise, but we got to get this thing closer before we get to that point."
Russian officials are opposed to Western troops in Ukraine, but have not ruled out a security guarantee for Kyiv. Speaking during a joint media appearance with Mr Trump after their nearly three-hour long meeting, Mr Putin said on Aug 15: "I agree with President Trump. He said today that Ukraine's security must be ensured by all means. Of course, we are ready to work on this."
Mr Witkoff told Fox News Sunday that Russia had also agreed to passing a law against taking any more of Ukraine by force.
"The Russians agreed on enshrining legislatively language that would prevent them from - or that they would attest to not attempting to take any more land from Ukraine after a peace deal, where they would attest to not violating any European borders," he said.
Any security guarantees offered to Mr Zelensky could also include a commitment from the United States, Mr Rubio told Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures, an option that many of Mr Trump's MAGA supporters have rejected up to now.
"It would be a very big move by the president, if he were to offer a US commitment to a security guarantee," Mr Rubio said. "It tells you how badly he wants peace, how much he values peace, that he would be willing to make a concession like that ...That's what we'll talk about tomorrow."
In a social media post, Mr Trump wrote, "BIG PROGRESS ON RUSSIA. STAY TUNED!" But he gave no details.
Mr Rubio said US officials discussed security details for Ukraine with the national security advisers of multiple European countries on Aug 16, adding that the aim would be to build in details that could ultimately be presented to Russia as part of a peace agreement.
He told Fox News that the talks between Mr Trump and Mr Putin on Aug 15 had narrowed the number of key issues, which include drawing borders and military alliances for Ukraine as well as security guarantees. "There's a lot of work that remains," Mr Rubio added.
According to sources, Mr Trump and Mr Putin discussed proposals for Russia to relinquish tiny pockets of occupied Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine ceding a swathe of fortified land in the east and freezing the front lines elsewhere.
Mr Rubio said Russia and Ukraine would not be able to get everything they want.
"If one side gets everything they want, that's not a peace deal. It's called surrender, and I don't think this is a war that's going to end anytime soon on the basis of surrender," Mr Rubio told CNN.
In a separate interview on ABC, Mr Rubio said if a deal could not be reached to end the war, existing US sanctions on Russia would continue, and more could be added.
When Mr Zelensky visited the White House in February, the meeting ended in a shouting match. Mr Rubio, speaking to CBS, dismissed the idea that the European leaders were coming to Washington to protect Mr Zelensky.
"They're not coming here tomorrow to keep Zelensky from being bullied. They're coming here tomorrow because we've been working with the Europeans," he said. "We invited them to come." REUTERS
Sign Our PetitionThe recent discussions surrounding potential NATO-like protections for Ukraine, as highlighted in the meeting between President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, reveal a complex interplay of geopolitical maneuvering, historical context, and the ongoing struggles for sovereignty and peace in Eastern Europe. The notion of extending Article 5-like protections to Ukraine is particularly significant, considering the backdrop of Russia's aggressive military actions since its full-scale invasion in February 2022. This development merits critical examination, especially in light of the historical patterns of imperialism and the aspirations of nations to defend their territorial integrity.
Historically, Ukraine has been a focal point of conflict, particularly during the Soviet era and the lead-up to its independence in 1991. The 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia reignited centuries-old tensions between these neighboring states, reflecting a broader struggle against imperialistic tendencies. Offering NATO-like protections to Ukraine represents not just a strategic military alliance but also a recognition of Ukraine's right to self-determination. In a world where global power dynamics continue to shift, acknowledging the sovereignty of nations like Ukraine is paramount in countering the narratives of authoritarianism that have often undermined democratic movements.
The discussions about a potential security guarantee also intersect with the broader social and political struggles within the United States. Trump's foreign policy approach, characterized by an alignment with nationalist sentiments and a skepticism of international alliances, has faced pushback from diverse constituencies advocating for a more robust and principled U.S. foreign policy. The MAGA supporters’ apparent resistance to international commitments underscores a significant divide in American political discourse, one that challenges the very fabric of multilateralism and collective security that has defined NATO since its inception. The progressive vision for foreign policy advocates for solidarity with nations striving for democracy, which is directly challenged by isolationist tendencies.
Moreover, the recent rhetoric from both Trump and Putin regarding legislative commitments against further territorial aggression from Russia raises questions about the sincerity of such promises. Historically, treaties and agreements have often been undermined by the parties involved when geopolitical interests shift. The skepticism surrounding Russia's willingness to abide by such agreements should not be underestimated; past experiences, such as the Minsk agreements, demonstrate the difficulty in achieving lasting peace through assurances that are not backed by substantial international support and oversight.
As the discussion unfolds regarding Ukraine's security guarantees, it is essential to connect these events to the ongoing global struggles for peace and justice. The war in Ukraine is not merely a regional conflict but a litmus test for the international community's commitment to upholding the principles of sovereignty and human rights against aggressive imperialism. Engaging in dialogues about security guarantees must align with the values of equity, accountability, and respect for international law. As citizens and advocates for justice, it is crucial to hold leaders accountable, ensuring that the rhetoric of peace translates into actionable support for nations under threat, emphasizing the importance of global solidarity in addressing the challenges posed by authoritarian regimes.
In conclusion, the discussions surrounding NATO-like protections for Ukraine serve as a reminder of the interconnectedness of historical narratives, geopolitical strategies, and the ongoing struggles for justice. The need for a principled and comprehensive approach to foreign policy that prioritizes the sovereignty of nations, the protection of human rights, and the promotion of peace is more pressing than ever. As we navigate this complex landscape, it is essential to advocate for policies that reflect these values, urging our leaders to embrace a vision of global cooperation that stands against aggression and champions the rights of all nations to determine their own futures.
The recent discussions surrounding the potential offering of NATO-like protection to Ukraine by the United States, as brought to the forefront by Trump’s administration, illuminate a complex geopolitical landscape. The idea that the U.S. would extend security guarantees to Ukraine in lieu of NATO membership raises critical questions about both American foreign policy and the historical underpinnings of international alliances. At its core, this situation reflects a broader narrative of American involvement in foreign conflicts, deeply rooted in the post-World War II era and the Cold War, wherein the U.S. positioned itself as a global leader and protector against authoritarianism. By revisiting these historical contexts, we can better understand the implications of such guarantees on both Ukraine's sovereignty and regional stability.
Historically, NATO was established in 1949 as a collective defense mechanism to counter Soviet expansionism after the devastation of World War II. The principle of Article 5, which states that an attack on one member is an attack on all, provided a significant deterrent against aggression. As the post-Soviet landscape evolved, NATO expanded eastward, prompting tensions with Russia. This historical backdrop is crucial to understanding the current negotiations involving Ukraine. Ukraine's aspiration for NATO membership has been a contentious issue and a catalyst for the ongoing conflict with Russia, which views such an expansion as a direct threat to its sphere of influence. The conversations surrounding U.S. guarantees for Ukraine thus represent not only a potential shift in strategy but also an acknowledgment of the complexities that have emerged from decades of geopolitical maneuvering.
From a contemporary perspective, the idea of extending security guarantees to Ukraine presents both opportunities and challenges. On one hand, such guarantees could bolster Ukraine’s defense capabilities and send a strong message to Russia regarding territorial integrity and international law. On the other hand, they could escalate tensions further, potentially leading to a more direct confrontation between NATO and Russian forces. As citizens and advocates, it is imperative to approach this situation with caution, emphasizing diplomatic solutions alongside military support. The goal should be to foster an environment where dialogue and negotiation are prioritized over aggression, promoting peace rather than deepening divisions.
In terms of concrete actions, Americans can play a pivotal role in shaping the discourse surrounding these developments. Engaging in informed discussions about the implications of military intervention and security guarantees is crucial. Grassroots movements and advocacy groups can help raise awareness about the importance of prioritizing diplomatic resolutions over military escalations. Additionally, citizens should hold their representatives accountable, urging them to pursue policies that promote peace and stability rather than further entrenching the U.S. in foreign conflicts. By fostering a well-informed electorate that values peaceful resolutions, there is a greater chance of influencing policy decisions that align with these principles.
Finally, it is essential to educate ourselves and others on the historical and political contexts that shape current events. Understanding the implications of U.S. foreign policy not only allows for a more nuanced discussion but also equips individuals to engage effectively with differing perspectives. Educational initiatives that promote awareness of international relations, the historical roots of conflict, and the importance of diplomacy can empower citizens to advocate for a more just and peaceful world. As we navigate the complexities of global politics, let us champion dialogue and understanding as the true pillars of security and stability, urging our leaders to do the same.
In light of the recent discussions surrounding NATO-like protections for Ukraine, it is crucial to consider the personal and collective actions we can take to advocate for peace, security, and support for Ukraine. Here is a detailed list of ideas to mobilize ourselves and our communities:
### What Can We Personally Do About This?
1. **Educate Ourselves and Others**: Understanding the complexities of international relations and the situation in Ukraine can help us articulate our perspectives more effectively. Share articles and resources with friends and family to raise awareness about the conflict, its implications, and the role of international alliances.
2. **Support Humanitarian Efforts**: Contribute to organizations providing aid to those affected by the conflict. This can include donating to charities focused on humanitarian relief or raising funds through community events.
3. **Engage Politically**: Reach out to elected representatives to express our views on U.S. foreign policy regarding Ukraine. This can be done through emails, letters, and phone calls.
4. **Participate in Local Activism**: Join or organize local peace rallies, discussions, or community forums to advocate for diplomatic solutions and highlight the importance of supporting Ukraine.
5. **Use Social Media**: Utilize social media platforms to advocate for peace and justice for Ukraine. Share relevant information, engage in discussions, and promote petitions or campaigns.
### What Exact Actions Can We Personally Take?
#### 1. Contact Elected Officials
- **Who to Write To**: - Your local Congressman/Congresswoman - Senators representing your state
- **Example of Officials** (You can find specific names based on your state): - **Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY)** - Email: schumer.senate.gov/contact/email-chuck - Office: 322 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
- **Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)** - Email: warren.senate.gov/?p=email_senator - Office: 309 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510
- **Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY)** (Example) - Email: ocasio-cortez.house.gov/contact - Office: 2182 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515
#### 2. Sign and Share Petitions
- **Petition Example**: - **"Support Ukraine’s Right to Self-Defense"** – A petition advocating for continued military and humanitarian aid for Ukraine can be found on platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org. - **How to Promote It**: - Share the petition on social media with a call to action, explaining its importance.
#### 3. Join Advocacy Groups
- **Organizations to Consider**: - **Ukrainian National Women's League of America (UNWLA)** - **National Democratic Institute (NDI)** - **Action**: Attend events they host or volunteer for initiatives that support Ukraine.
#### 4. Write Letters to the Editor
- **What to Say**: - Express your concerns regarding the U.S. response to the Ukraine crisis, advocating for a robust commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty. - **Where to Submit**: - Local newspapers or online publications that cover foreign policy issues.
### General Messaging Tips
- **Clear and Concise**: Clearly state your position and the action you want your representatives to take. - **Personal Connection**: Share why this issue matters to you and your community. Personal stories can resonate more than statistics. - **Call for Peace**: Emphasize the importance of diplomatic solutions and humanitarian support for affected populations. By actively engaging in these actions, we can collectively influence the discourse around Ukraine and advocate for an approach centered on cooperation, peace, and solidarity with those affected by the conflict.