European leaders have rejected the idea that Washington and Moscow can reshape the continent’s security arrangements without direct European participation. The dispute comes as US-led negotiations on ending Russia’s war against Ukraine are expected to resume in Abu Dhabi.
President Donald Trump said the United States could be moving towards a “very big” agreement involving not only Ukraine but potentially “all of Europe”. European Union officials, Poland and Ukraine responded by insisting that no settlement affecting the continent can be imposed over their heads.
Europe rejects a security settlement negotiated without Europeans
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said Europe already had a security architecture in place and argued that Russia could not have a veto over the security choices of European states.
Her comments reflected a central concern in Brussels and several European capitals: a deal negotiated mainly between Washington and Moscow could revive the concept of spheres of influence and weaken the ability of sovereign countries to choose their own alliances.
Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said an arrangement concerning Ukraine and Europe’s future without European involvement would be politically unacceptable and practically impossible. His position underlines Poland’s focus on preventing any agreement that might leave countries on NATO’s eastern flank exposed.
Ukraine also rejected the idea that Russia should be treated as a guarantor of European security. Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha said the priority should be protecting Europe from Russian aggression rather than negotiating the division of influence with Moscow.
What did Donald Trump propose?
Trump gave few details about the possible agreement. He said it could extend beyond Ukraine and involve the whole of Europe, while describing the prospective deal in highly positive terms.
Jared Kushner, a US special envoy and adviser involved in the diplomatic effort, said Washington was working on a broader European security framework. The stated aim is to address the security concerns of the parties involved and create conditions for a lasting peace.
The proposal appears to connect two issues that have previously been discussed separately:
- Security guarantees for Ukraine after the war
- The wider military and political relationship between Russia, the United States, NATO and European countries
That connection has intensified concern in Europe because Moscow has long demanded limits on NATO’s presence and influence in eastern Europe. Before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the Kremlin called for major changes to the European security system, including restrictions on NATO forces in countries that joined the alliance after 1997.
NATO rejected those demands and maintained that independent states have the right to decide their own security arrangements.
Why the Abu Dhabi talks matter
US representatives are preparing for renewed discussions between Kyiv and Moscow in Abu Dhabi. The talks will test whether Washington can bring together positions that remain sharply different.
Ukraine is seeking credible guarantees against another Russian attack. Russia has pressed for restrictions on NATO and a greater say over security arrangements in eastern Europe. European governments want any settlement to protect Ukraine’s sovereignty and avoid rewarding military aggression.
Earlier discussions in Brussels brought together representatives from NATO, the European Union and major European powers. The meetings focused on Ukraine’s future security and the wider European framework that could follow a peace agreement.
Kushner has said European partners would be consulted around the Abu Dhabi negotiations and could participate directly in a broader multilateral process if progress is made. That assurance may help address concerns about Europe being excluded, but it does not resolve the fundamental disagreement over who should shape the final settlement.
The EU’s role in any future agreement
European Commission chief spokesperson Paula Pinho said substantial work remained before a peace agreement could be reached. She also stressed that the European Union would determine its own security matters.
The EU is not a substitute for NATO, which remains the principal military alliance for many European countries. However, the Union has important political, economic, diplomatic and sanctions powers that would be relevant to any agreement affecting Ukraine and Russia.
Any settlement could also have implications for:
- EU sanctions and their possible future adjustment
- Financial and military support for Ukraine
- European defence planning and spending
- Relations between the EU, NATO and the United States
- Ukraine’s future relationship with European institutions
For Ireland, the debate matters because decisions on Ukraine, sanctions, European security and humanitarian support are made within a wider EU framework in which Ireland participates. Ireland is not a NATO member, but it remains involved in EU discussions and decisions connected to the war and European security.
What happens next?
The Abu Dhabi discussions are expected to be an early test of whether the United States can develop a negotiating process acceptable to Ukraine, Russia and European governments. No final agreement has been announced, and the proposed wider security framework remains at the diplomatic discussion stage.
The main questions will be whether Ukraine receives guarantees it considers credible, whether European countries are included in decision-making and whether any arrangement preserves the right of states to determine their own alliances.
NATO has said allied countries are working towards a just and sustainable end to the conflict. European officials, meanwhile, have made clear that a deal affecting the continent cannot simply be agreed between Washington and Moscow and presented to Europe as a finished settlement.
Conclusion
The latest EU news from Brussels and Warsaw points to a firm European position: any future arrangement on Ukraine and the continent’s security must include Europe directly. The Abu Dhabi talks may advance diplomacy, but a lasting agreement will face strong resistance if it weakens Ukraine’s sovereignty, undermines existing security arrangements or allows Russia to dictate the choices of European states.