Development of security guarantees for Ukraine faced with problems

Before the end of the year, the United States plans to hold a second round of negotiations with Ukraine to determine security guarantees, which the G7 leaders agreed to prepare on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Vilnius in July, writes The Wall Street Journal (WSJ). In addition to the G7 states, a total of 18 states have agreed to provide military assistance to Ukraine.

At the same time, as the WSJ points out, the White House does not understand what kind of guarantees the United States can provide to Ukraine, given that the new administration after the 2024 elections will be able to cancel almost all the obligations of its predecessors.

European governments fear that in this case they will not be able to compensate for the drop in the amount of American military and financial assistance to Kyiv due to difficulties in the European economy and the weakness of the military-industrial complex. Since February last year, Washington has sent more than $40 billion worth of weapons and equipment to Ukraine. Germany and the United Kingdom, Europe’s leading arms producers, have allocated weapons worth between $7 billion and $8 billion, according to data from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. As a result, European leaders are looking for new ways to secure commitments to assist the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Trump has repeatedly criticized the Biden administration for US policy on Ukraine and called for a cessation of hostilities. On August 23, in an interview with Tucker Carlson, he reiterated that the armed conflict in Ukraine would not have occurred if he had remained president in 2020. Trump is currently the most likely Republican presidential candidate: his popularity among Republican voters, according to aggregate data surveys of the RealClearPolitics project exceeds 55%.

President Biden during the Vilnius summit said that he would negotiate with the Ukrainian side on long-term bilateral security commitments, while, according to the publication’s interlocutors, the White House has yet to determine the parameters of this agreement. One of such proposals, according to officials, could be the conclusion of a memorandum of understanding, which would not include obligations for the supply of specific types of weapons and their timing. Under US law, this document will not require congressional approval.

At the same time, the Financial Times (FT), citing sources, wrote that the EU member states are facing disagreements over an increase of 86 billion euros in the budget of the organization over the next four years due to the growing budget deficit of European states, which pose a threat to the financial support for Ukraine. According to the publication, Brussels’ requests are aimed at increasing the EU budget, while Germany and the Netherlands, on the contrary, are calling for spending cuts.

According to the FT, of this amount, the EU plans to allocate 20 billion euros to help Ukraine over four years, including the supply of weapons and the training of military personnel. The funds will be directed to the European Peace Fund, which will partially cover the costs of states for the purchase of weapons and ammunition for Ukraine. Of the remaining amount, it is planned to allocate almost 19 billion euros to cover the high interest costs on EU joint loans, about 2 billion euros – to increase administrative costs, including an increase in the salaries of EU officials. Another 15 billion euros will go to finance projects related to the growth of migration, and 10 billion euros will go to the new EU innovation fund. The idea of ​​raising salaries for European bureaucrats is especially unpopular, the newspaper notes.

After Trump’s hypothetical return to power, it is unlikely that the United States will stop military assistance to Ukraine, says Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies. According to him, too much has already been invested in pumping Ukraine with weapons, it has become mainstream and the new president is unlikely to be able to revise this policy. In addition, a significant part of the weapons are produced at American factories, and Trump’s electorate works there, the expert continues. At the same time, he can reduce economic assistance, as well as put pressure on the Kiev regime through anti-corruption policies, especially given that the scandal around Joe Biden’s son Hunter is connected with Ukraine, recalls Pukhov.

Some correction of American policy in the Ukrainian direction in the event of the victory of the Republican candidate in the elections may occur, Dmitry Trenin, a leading researcher at the IMEMO Center for International Security, believes. “Whoever the new president is, Congress will begin to more closely monitor the allocation of assistance to Ukraine and take longer to consider the administration’s requests for its provision,” the expert said.

On the other hand, Trenin continues, under a new administration, the White House will be forced to provide some form of security guarantee in exchange for Kyiv’s refusal to join NATO. According to the expert, Ukraine’s entry into the North Atlantic Alliance is unacceptable for Washington: such a prospect promises the United States great risks, which no administration can take. “Perhaps, the Ukrainians will be offered guarantees on the Pakistani model during the Cold War. That is, the Americans will probably transfer a certain amount of weapons to the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, provide military-technical assistance, but without legal obligations to protect Ukraine, ”the expert concluded.