Putin agrees to NATO-like security guarantees for Ukraine in summit with Trump: Witkoff
mynbc15.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 7:21:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, Media Coverage & Press Relations
(TNND) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed to allow the U.S. and its European allies to offer Ukraine security guarantee resembling NATO during his summit with President Donald Trump.
The move comes as an eventual deal to end the three-and-a-half-year war in Ukraine, according to special U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff who revealed the information on CNN's State of the Union on Sunday.
"We were able to win the following concession: That the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in NATO," adding that it "was the first time we had ever heard the Russians agree to that."
Article 5 protection states that an armed attack against one or more members of NATO's 32-member military alliance, is considered an attack against all members.
Witkoff was a part of the talks on Friday at a military base in Anchorage, Alaska along with Secretary of State Marco Rubio. While few details were offered on how the protection agreement would work, Witkoff called it "game-changing" as it appears to be a shift for Putin who has a long-standing objection towards Ukraine's potential NATO membership.
During Sunday's interview, Witkoff also revealed that Russia had agreed to enact a law that it would not "go after any other European countries and violate their sovereignty. And there was plenty more."
At a press conference with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen responded to the news saying, "We welcome President Trump's willingness to contribute to Article 5-like security guarantees for Ukraine and the 'Coalition of the willing' -- including the European Union -- is ready to do its share."
Zelenskyy thanks the United States for recent moves showing that the Trump administration was willing to support such guarantees but maintained that there are still uncertainties.
"It is important that America agrees to work with Europe to provide security guarantees for Ukraine," he said, "But there are no details how it will work, and what America's role will be, Europe's role will be and what the EU can do, and this is our main task, we need security to work in practice like Article 5 of NATO, and we consider EU accession to be part of the security guarantees."
Witkoff defended Trump's decision to stop pushing Russia to agree to an immediate ceasefire, which the president had established as a benchmark prior to going into the meeting. Witkoff said that the president pivoted toward a peace deal because of the progress made.
"We covered almost all the other issues necessary for a peace deal," Witkoff said. "We began to see some moderation in the way they're thinking about getting to a final peace deal."
On CBS News' Face the Nation, Rubio said he did not believe that imposing new sanctions on Russia would push Putin to accept a ceasefire.
"If he did this now, the moment the president puts those additional sanctions, that's the end of the talks," Rubio said. "We want to wind up with a peace deal that ends this war so Ukraine can go on with the rest of their lives and rebuild their country and be assured that this is never going to happen again. That's the goal here."
Rubio said that Kyiv "is going to have to accept things, but they're going to have to get things too," referring to the NATO-like security agreement.
Rubio emphasized this by saying that Ukraine is "a sovereign country" that has "a right... to enter into security alliances with other countries to prevent an invasion in the future, to prevent threats to their national security."
"That's not an unreasonable request," Rubio said.
On Monday, Zelenskyy along with European leaders are scheduled to meet with the Trump at the White House for further discussions.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and former President Donald Trump has reignited discussions about Ukraine’s security, NATO, and the geopolitical dynamics that have shaped Eastern Europe in the post-Soviet era. The reported agreement on NATO-like security guarantees for Ukraine, as articulated by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff, reflects a significant shift in the conversation surrounding Ukraine’s defense strategy. Historically, Ukraine has been caught in the crosshairs of Russian aggression and Western aspirations, and this news indicates a potential recalibration of commitments that could reshape the region’s security landscape. However, it also raises questions about the real intentions behind such agreements and their implications for the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
The concept of Article 5, which asserts that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all, is foundational to the alliance's mutual defense strategy. Ukraine, which has sought closer ties with NATO since the 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia, views these guarantees as critical to its sovereignty and territorial integrity. While the acknowledgment from Russia of potential security guarantees presents a glimmer of hope for a peaceful resolution, it is essential to view this development through a historical lens. Russia’s past actions, including its military interventions and support for separatist movements in Eastern Ukraine, raise doubts about whether this newfound flexibility is genuine or merely a strategic maneuver.
Moreover, the notion of security guarantees must be scrutinized in the context of the broader historical relationship between the West and Russia. Since the end of the Cold War, the eastward expansion of NATO has been a point of contention for Russia, which perceives this as a direct threat to its sphere of influence. The current agreement could be seen as an attempt by the U.S. to manage Russian aggression while simultaneously reinforcing its own geopolitical stance. However, it is crucial to remember that security guarantees are not just political statements; they must be backed by tangible actions and commitments. The lack of specifics regarding how these protections will function raises concerns about their effectiveness and the sincerity of the parties involved.
In addition to the immediate implications for Ukraine, this summit underscores the ongoing struggles for sovereignty and self-determination faced by countries in Eastern Europe. The Ukrainian people have endured tremendous hardship as a result of the conflict, and any resolution must prioritize their voices and needs. The question remains: how can a peace deal be achieved without adequately addressing the historical grievances and the aspirations of those directly affected by the conflict? It is vital for the international community to support Ukraine in its quest for a secure and prosperous future, one that is not merely dictated by the interests of larger powers.
As discussions about security guarantees unfold, it is essential to consider the role of grassroots movements and civil society in Ukraine. The desire for sovereignty and democratic governance is not just a political issue but a deeply rooted social struggle. Ukraine’s civil society, which has been at the forefront of pro-democracy movements, must be included in the conversation about its future. The U.S. and its allies should not only focus on military guarantees but also on supporting Ukraine’s social and political development, ensuring that the voices of ordinary Ukrainians are heard in negotiations that will shape their nation’s destiny.
In conclusion, while the agreement on NATO-like security guarantees for Ukraine may seem like a positive step towards peace, it is imperative to approach this news with a critical eye. The historical context of the region, the complexities of international relations, and the ongoing struggles for self-determination must inform our understanding of this development. As the situation evolves, it is crucial for advocates of social justice and human rights to remain engaged and to hold all parties accountable to ensure that any agreements made lead to a just and lasting peace for the Ukrainian people.
The recent developments surrounding the Ukraine crisis and the negotiations between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin have ignited a complex discourse on international relations, security guarantees, and the geopolitical landscape. The announcement that Russia may allow the U.S. and its allies to extend NATO-like security guarantees to Ukraine marks a significant shift in the dynamics of the conflict that has persisted for over three years. It raises crucial questions about the future of NATO, the sovereignty of Ukraine, and the broader implications for European security. This situation must be analyzed not only through the lens of diplomacy and military strategy but also in light of historical precedents and the political realities that shape them.
Historically, the conflict in Ukraine has its roots in a long-standing tug-of-war between Western influence and Russian nationalism. Following the 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia, Ukraine has been caught in a geopolitical quagmire, struggling to assert its sovereignty while navigating the competing interests of global powers. This moment in history underscores the necessity of a united front among democratic nations, particularly the U.S. and its European allies, to counter authoritarian tendencies. The agreement, although tentative, to provide Ukraine with Article 5-like security guarantees reflects a recognition of the imperative to stand up to aggression and support nations seeking to maintain their independence.
As citizens of a democratic society, Americans have a role to play in shaping the discourse around this issue. Engaging in informed conversations about the strategic importance of supporting Ukraine can help to foster greater understanding of U.S. foreign policy goals and the implications of inaction. Advocacy for stronger diplomatic ties with Ukraine, as well as support for international cooperation, can be promoted through grassroots campaigns. Community forums, educational workshops, and outreach programs can serve as platforms for discussing the importance of global alliances and their impact on national security. Encouraging a more significant public dialogue about foreign policy can empower citizens to hold their representatives accountable and advocate for a robust response to authoritarianism.
Furthermore, it is essential to recognize that security guarantees are not merely military commitments; they entail a broader responsibility to uphold democratic values and human rights. Engaging in conversations about the moral imperatives of supporting Ukraine aligns with a long-standing tradition in American foreign policy that champions liberty and justice. By framing the discussion around Ukraine's right to self-determination, advocates can challenge narratives that downplay the significance of international solidarity. This approach can resonate with individuals concerned about the global rise of authoritarianism, inviting them to see the struggle in Ukraine as part of a larger fight for democracy.
Additionally, educational insights must be shared to cultivate a more nuanced understanding of the geopolitical landscape. The complexities of NATO's role, the historical context of Russian expansionism, and the implications of security agreements should be brought to light. By analyzing past instances of international conflict and cooperation, citizens can better appreciate the stakes involved in the current situation. Utilizing various forms of media—social media campaigns, podcasts, or articles—can help disseminate this information widely, engaging a broader audience in a critical dialogue about the importance of international alliances.
In conclusion, the agreement to pursue NATO-like security guarantees for Ukraine represents a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle for Ukrainian sovereignty and European stability. It is a call to action for Americans to engage actively with the challenges posed by authoritarian regimes and to advocate for a global order that prioritizes democratic values. By fostering informed discussions, promoting education, and supporting international cooperation, we can contribute to a collective effort to secure a more just and peaceful world. In doing so, we can turn the complexities of international relations into a platform for advocating for the rights and freedoms of those who seek to resist oppression and assert their autonomy on the global stage.
In light of the recent developments surrounding the summit between President Trump and President Putin, there are several actionable steps that individuals can take to engage with this complex situation regarding Ukraine and international security. Here is a detailed list of ideas and concrete actions to consider:
### Personal Actions
1. **Educate Yourself and Others:** - Stay informed about the geopolitical situation in Ukraine and the implications of security guarantees. Share this knowledge with friends and family to foster informed discussions around international relations.
2. **Support Peace Initiatives:** - Get involved with organizations advocating for peace and diplomacy in Ukraine. Groups such as the International Crisis Group or the Peace Corps often have volunteer opportunities.
3. **Promote Awareness on Social Media:** - Use platforms like Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram to raise awareness about the situation in Ukraine, promote peaceful resolutions, and encourage dialogue about international cooperation.
### Concrete Actions
1. **Petitions:** - **Petition for Peace in Ukraine:** Support online petitions through platforms like Change.org or MoveOn.org that advocate for diplomatic resolutions and humanitarian aid for Ukraine. - Example: [Petition for Ukraine Aid](https://www.change.org/p/support-ukraine). 2. **Contact Elected Officials:** - Write to your congressional representatives to express your views on the importance of supporting Ukraine and advocating for peace. Here are some key representatives to consider contacting:
- **U.S. Senator Dick Durbin** Email: [senator_durbin@durbin.senate.gov](mailto:senator_durbin@durbin.senate.gov) Address: 711 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
- **U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi** Email: [rep.pelosi@mail.house.gov](mailto:rep.pelosi@mail.house.gov) Address: 1236 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
- **U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Bob Menendez** Email: [info@menendez.senate.gov](mailto:info@menendez.senate.gov) Address: 528 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
- **U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken** Email: [contact@state.gov](mailto:contact@state.gov) Address: U.S. Department of State, 2201 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20520
3. **Write Letters:** - Send thoughtful letters to your representatives discussing your concerns regarding the evolving situation in Ukraine, emphasizing the importance of security guarantees and diplomatic solutions. - **What to say:** Express support for Ukraine's right to sovereignty, encourage the U.S. to work collaboratively with European allies, and advocate for immediate humanitarian assistance to those affected by the conflict.
4. **Attend Local Events:** - Participate in local discussions, panels, or community events focused on international relations, peacebuilding, and the situation in Ukraine. Engaging with your community can amplify your voice and influence.
5. **Support Nonprofits:** - Donate to organizations providing humanitarian aid to Ukraine, such as the International Rescue Committee or Doctors Without Borders, which are actively working to help those affected by the conflict.
### Summary While the geopolitical landscape is complex and often disheartening, individual actions can contribute to a collective voice advocating for peace and security. Through education, awareness, and direct engagement with governmental representatives, individuals can play an important role in shaping the discourse around Ukraine and international security.