Assessing the Viability of Security Assurances for Ukraine

In recent discussions, the idea of providing a security guarantee to Ukraine has been proposed as a potential solution to the ongoing conflict in the region. However, this proposal faces numerous challenges and obstacles.

One of the main issues is the ongoing armed conflict in parts of Ukraine, particularly in the eastern regions. Suggesting a territorial limitation to the security guarantee in unoccupied western regions is flawed, as it fails to address the root cause of the conflict.

The feasibility of such a guarantee is also questionable due to legal and practical obstacles. A sui generis model for Ukraine may be required to support the country, as deployments within an existing framework (UN, EU, NATO, OSCE) are unlikely. Building a formidable command structure to back up a security guarantee would be difficult and time-consuming.

Moreover, the Russian violations of international humanitarian law continue unabated, making it implausible to assume that this would be any different in the case of a Western security guarantee unless it is backed up by a credible deterrent. The Russian Federation's past actions, such as the annexation of Crimea in 2014, demonstrate a disregard for international commitments.

Legally binding territorial concessions to Russia would condone an act of annexation, which is illegal according to the Stimson Doctrine of 1932. A forced cession of the entire Donbas in eastern Ukraine is out of the question as a new demarcation line.

The non-committal nature of Article 5 of the NATO Treaty means that there is no legally binding commitment to use force in the case of an attack. During the Cold War, over 300,000 US troops in Europe provided a substantial delay of any Soviet attack due to their willingness and ability to follow through on promises of collective action. However, the current US president's preoccupation with "making a deal" cannot change the fact that robust security guarantees without European or American troops in Ukraine, to which Russia agrees, are unattainable.

The current eagerness and insistence of the U.S. President to "make a deal" is subject to Russian consent, which seems unattainable short of what should be seen as factually and legally untenable concessions from Ukraine. Russia is demanding untenable concessions from Ukraine in exchange for its consent to any security guarantee.

European politicians have called for the development of security mechanisms and strategies to assist Ukraine in managing future relations with Russia without NATO membership. European politicians such as NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte have discussed the option of Article 5-like security guarantees without formal NATO membership, as part of ongoing European debates.

However, the current NATO presence in the Baltic states and Poland is insufficient to credibly support Ukraine in defending against Russian incursions, with an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 troops needed. The United States and other European nations could potentially offer Article 5-like language as a security guarantee for Ukraine, but this would require political will and a highly action-oriented command structure, which may be lacking due to the idea of a "dormant NATO" gaining popularity in the U.S.

In conclusion, while security guarantees for Ukraine are being considered as a potential solution to the ongoing conflict, numerous challenges and obstacles must be addressed. The ongoing armed conflict, legal and practical obstacles, and the implausibility of assuming a change in Russian behaviour without a credible deterrent are just a few of the issues that need to be addressed. The development of a sui generis model, the need for a formidable command structure, and the insufficient current NATO presence in the region are also key considerations. Ultimately, the success of any security guarantee will depend on the political will and ability of the international community to provide a credible deterrent and support Ukraine in its efforts to maintain its territorial integrity and political independence.