It is difficult to work out exactly what is going on, as all the mainstream media reporting on the so-called “peace talks” – actually manoeuvring between Ukraine, Europe and the Trump administration, is threadbare. That may not be their fault. It could be that no official statements are being produced and they are having to make do with passing comments from parties involved.
That said; it seems that, based on Guardian [1] and Reuters [2] reporting that the US is ready to offer Ukraine some kind of “security guarantees”, possibly limited to 15 years. As far as I can make out this does not involve a commitment to actually fight Russia were Russia to attack again. It seems to concern intelligence, provision of weapons and re-application of sanctions. Then, off the back of this, the coalition of the losers in Europe are leaping into the breach, promising actual troops on the ground and a “regeneration” of the Ukrainian army:
This is a declaration of intent to deploy forces to Ukraine in event of a peace deal
The ‘Multinational Force for Ukraine’ will act as a reassurance force to bolster security guarantees and Ukraine’s ability to return to peace and stability by supporting the regeneration of Ukraine’s own forces
Alongside our plans for a coordination cell, post-ceasefire the UK and France will also establish ‘military hubs’ across Ukraine to enable the deployment and build protected facilities for weapons and military equipment to support Ukraine’s defensive needs.” [1]
It paves the way for the legal framework under which British, French and partner forces could operate on Ukrainian soil, securing Ukraine’s skies and seas and regenerating Ukraine’s armed forces for the future, [2]
All the quotes are from loser Starmer.
My reading of this is as follows; the US negotiators genuinely want to end this, though, (as Mearsheimer argues), without forcing Kiev to surrender, since that would make the US look like a loser. So, they have offered some kind of “security guarantees” – to try to give Zelensky the trophy he needs to take home to his people and stay in power. They are careful to avoid committing troops and getting into a position where they could end up in a shooting war with Russia. The proposed guarantees essentially envisage a return to the current position – the US provides intelligence and arms, imposes sanctions, but is not directly involved in the fighting. Russia, might be able to accept that as part of a peace deal. If that deal delivers their key demands Putin and his advisers might well reason that they could accept it since once they have their core demands met they would have no plan to “attack” Ukraine again anyway. And, even if Ukrainian nationalists managed to cause a provocation and restart the war, the situation would be no worse than it is now. So far, so good.
And, then, enter the spoilers. Having obtained the above from the US, Zelensky now flies to Europe and persuades the Coalition of the Losers to add their bit. And now we have the re-emergence of the idea of “porcupine Ukraine” – with the UK and France putting troops into Ukraine and building up their armed forces. The UK and French troops would be presented as “trainers”. It is very, very hard, however, to see Moscow agreeing to this. Notice Starmer’s “in the event of a peace deal”. But; in all likelihood, the proposed peace deal can not happen if it is predicated on the UK and France putting their troops into Ukraine the day after it is signed. Russia has said this time and time again in the recent months, loudly and clearly. And this is rational; the build-up of Ukrainian armed forces was one of the core reasons for their “special operation”. Why on earth would they accept a peace deal, which is based on allowing just this?! If they were losing on the battlefield then, maybe. But they are not losing; they are winning. [3]
What are the Europeans up to? To answer this question it helps to bear in mind that we can’t really ask, “what are the Europeans thinking”. These under pigs don’t really think as such. They posture for the media and for their own self-image. They act out their propaganda narratives. They emit slogans. But thinking as in rational, strategic analysis, is largely lacking. Therefore; the idea that this is a deliberate and planned attempt to sabotage any possible peace may be crediting them with too much thinking. Though, they can surely not be unaware that that will be the result? It is just hard to work out what is going on. A very large part of it must be simply face-saving. The EU and the UK started this by thinking they could crush Russia, with their superior economic might and fancy weaponry. That has failed. (While under pressure the Russian economy is not on the verge of collapse and Russia can sustain this for another couple of years before having to make substantial sacrifices [4]). A peace deal, on Russia’s terms, which does not include muscle flexing from the EU will make the EU look like irrelevant losers to the whole world. (Some kind of karma; they tried to make Russia irrelevant and ended up making themselves irrelevant). I think, therefore, the main driver for these ideas about EU+UK forces on the ground in Ukraine, which is basically von der Leyen’s “porcupine Ukraine” idea, is to save face, to continue to present an image of European toughness – of Europe as stronger than and superior to Russia, and to keep Russia on the outside. As I’ve commented before; it is like retreating from a fight while puffing out your chest to make you appear strong.
But – this need to try to make it look like the Ukraine war is ending on their terms is very, very likely going to stop it ending at all.
I am going to risk a prediction. The EU’s borrowed money is not enough to sustain Kiev. [5] USD 50 billion a year for 2 years is about half of what Ukraine actually needs. Therefore Kiev will be obliged to surrender sometime this year, probably before the Summer. Since it will be a surrender and they will be the losers they will not be able to set the terms. This plan about UK and French “boots on the ground” will quietly go away – and will turn into some face-saving measure such as placing some jets in Poland. (Being rational, Russia would understand that that made no tangible difference to anything and so could accept it).
There is an alternative scenario. Somehow, Kiev manages to avoid a total collapse of the front-line. Their ever busy security services continue to launch operations on Russian soil, from behind these front lines. There is no “peace deal”. The current situation is prolonged. But, since all the long-term indicators are trending against Kiev, is it hard to see that this will not, eventually, have to end in a deal on Russia’s terms.
The long-shot is some kind of upheaval in Russia. In the first two years of the war Western leaders and media were shamelessly salivating about this prospect in public. All that stopped after the (predictable) failure of Kiev’s counter-offensive in Summer 2023. It is still a theoretical option but there is no evidence to make this a likely scenario. The world is not what they thought it was and Russia is not isolated.
Notes
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/jan/06/coalition-willing-paris-ukraine-zelenskyy-greenland-denmark-venezuela-trump-latest-news-updates
- https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-backs-security-guarantees-ukraine-summit-kyivs-allies-paris-2026-01-06/
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/03/ukraine-war-briefing-russia-makes-biggest-battleground-gains-since-first-year-of-war-analysis-shows
- https://edition.cnn.com/2025/12/20/business/russia-economy-struggling-ukraine-war-intl
- https://www.ft.com/content/48353046-3b28-400b-88e7-af5c316ff3f2 I don’t know about the reliability source but this EU related newsletter supports the idea that the existing loan is nothing like enough. https://newunionpost.eu/2025/12/04/eu-money-ukraine-frozen-asset-russia/