As Kyiv edges toward talks that could define the end of the war, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has laid down a stark condition: no peace deal without a long-term, legally binding security guarantee from the United States.
Ukraine links any peace deal to a 20-year US guarantee
Speaking at the Munich Security Conference, Zelenskyy said Ukraine would only sign a peace agreement with Russia if Washington commits to a security guarantee lasting at least two decades.
Kyiv wants a minimum 20-year, legally watertight US security pact before it can “sign a peace deal with dignity”.
According to Zelenskyy, US negotiators have so far put a 15-year guarantee on the table. For Ukraine, that falls short. The government in Kyiv wants a longer timeframe and highly specific commitments written into the text.
The deal would not just cover weapons supplies. It would define how the US would support a planned European reassurance force stationed inside Ukraine if a peace deal is eventually agreed.
Pressure to concede territory meets a firm ‘no’
Zelenskyy revealed that American officials had floated the idea that if Ukraine withdrew from the Donbas region, peace could come “as quickly as possible”. That suggestion, he said, is unacceptable.
The president stressed that millions of Ukrainians live in the Donbas and that abandoning the territory would be a betrayal of both citizens and the principles Ukraine is fighting for.
For Kyiv, territorial concessions in Donbas are off the table, regardless of diplomatic pressure or timelines set in Washington.
Frictions between the US, Europe and Kyiv’s expectations
Behind the scenes, tensions are growing not only between Ukraine and Russia, but also between Kyiv’s western backers. European governments are increasingly frustrated by what they see as US ambiguity over long-term security commitments to Ukraine.
➡️ Hotter Radiators And Lower Bills: The Free Winter Habit That Changes Everything
➡️ How walking speed influences calorie burn more than distance alone
➡️ Rodents flee instantly: the overlooked staple that drives rats away without traps
Many European officials argue that guarantees must be clear and public before any peace accord is signed. They fear a loosely defined US promise could unravel at the first change of administration in Washington.
Zelenskyy echoed that concern, saying different sides in the talks often seem to be “talking about completely different things”. From his perspective, too many conversations in Washington focus on Ukrainian concessions rather than Russian responsibility.
US offer to Europe comes with tough conditions
In Munich, US secretary of state Marco Rubio tried to reassure allies, declaring that “Europe and the US belong together” and proposing closer partnership on global security.
But his offer came with sharp conditions. Washington, he said, expects European alignment on issues such as climate, migration and tariffs. If those demands are not met, the US is prepared to act alone.
Strikingly, Rubio devoted little attention to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in his speech, beyond claiming that Washington had pressured India to reduce Russian oil imports. That omission did not go unnoticed among diplomats focused on Ukraine’s battlefield and negotiating table.
EU accession, elections and the clock on Ukraine’s democracy
Zelenskyy also used his time in Munich to push for clarity on Ukraine’s bid to join the European Union. Some EU officials have floated 2027 as a possible date, but Kyiv wants a firm commitment rather than vague estimates.
At the same time, Ukraine is facing pressure from the US to hold national elections by 15 May. Zelenskyy pushed back, saying a vote can only happen at least two months after a ceasefire so that polling stations and voters are not under threat of missiles and drones.
Kyiv argues that free elections under active bombardment would be a façade of democracy, not the real thing.
Trump’s push for a quick deal
Donald Trump has added his own pressure, publicly telling Zelenskyy to “get moving” on an agreement with Russia. According to Ukrainian officials, Trump wants a deal within months but has not spelled out what happens if Kyiv refuses to accept his timeline or conditions.
This uncertainty hangs heavily over the Geneva talks scheduled for next week, where Ukrainian, Russian and US negotiators are expected to meet in a trilateral format.
Geneva talks: energy strikes, Russian tactics and Iran’s role
Zelenskyy said the talks in Geneva will include Russia’s relentless strikes on Ukrainian energy infrastructure. He stated that not a single major energy plant in Ukraine has escaped damage, underscoring how deeply the war has hit everyday life, from heating to industry.
He also noted that Moscow has changed the head of its negotiation team, a move he views with suspicion. Rather than signaling a new strategy, Zelenskyy fears the reshuffle is a tactic to buy time while Russia continues attacks.
European leaders attending the Munich conference sounded pessimistic about a near-term breakthrough. One leader predicted at least another two years of war and said Europe still has the resources to support Ukraine for that period.
Zelenskyy himself set a grim benchmark for the battlefield, saying his military aim is to push Russian casualties to 50,000 killed or seriously injured each month, in the belief that sustained losses could force Moscow to rethink its strategy.
Iran’s drones and protests on the streets of Munich
The Ukrainian president also launched a strong verbal attack on Iran for supplying Shahed drones to Russia. Those drones have been used extensively against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure.
“Regimes like the one in Iran must not be given time. When they have time, they only kill more,” Zelenskyy argued.
His comments came as up to 200,000 protesters gathered in Munich calling for the Iranian regime to be overthrown. Zelenskyy said Ukraine had no prior conflict with Tehran, but the sale of drones that “are killing our people” had turned Iran into a direct contributor to the war.
What a 20-year security guarantee could look like
Behind the diplomatic language, Ukraine’s demand for a 20-year US guarantee raises concrete questions about what such a deal would include in practice.
- Long-term arms supplies and joint training programmes
- Intelligence sharing and cyber defence support
- US backing for a European security force on Ukrainian soil
- Economic support tied to reconstruction and energy resilience
- Clear steps toward EU and possibly NATO integration over time
Zelenskyy also mentioned a proposed “prosperity plan” under which the US would gain access to Ukrainian mineral resources in exchange for long-term investment and backing. He said no detailed terms have yet been exchanged, but the proposal signals that economic interests are woven into the security talks.
Why guarantees matter more to Ukraine than paper promises
For Kyiv, the insistence on a legally binding, multi-decade deal is shaped by bitter experience. The 1994 Budapest Memorandum offered Ukraine security assurances from major powers after it gave up its nuclear weapons. Those assurances did not prevent Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea or the full-scale invasion in 2022.
A 20-year guarantee backed by US law would aim to avoid another weak, easily ignored document. Ukrainian officials want specific language on how fast weapons would arrive, what kind of air defence coverage could be provided, and how quickly western troops or advisers might be deployed in a crisis.
| Issue | Ukraine’s concern | Desired outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Security guarantee length | Fear of short-term pledges collapsing with US politics | Minimum 20-year, cross-party backed treaty |
| Territorial concessions | Pressure to give up Donbas for quick peace | No formal loss of Ukrainian territory |
| Energy infrastructure | Ongoing Russian strikes on power plants | Defence systems and funds for rapid reconstruction |
| International role | Europe “practically absent” from key talks | Stronger EU presence in negotiations and post-war security |
Scenarios if Washington says yes – or walks away
If the US accepts a 20-year guarantee, Ukraine could sign a peace deal with firmer backing and a clearer pathway toward both EU membership and integration with western defence structures. That might stabilise eastern Europe over the long run, but it would also commit Washington to another major security role alongside its obligations in Asia and the Middle East.
If Washington refuses or only offers a weaker, shorter-term package, Kyiv may refuse to sign any deal at all, and the war could drag on for years. European states might still try to assemble their own guarantee structure, but without US weight, such a scheme would look more fragile in Moscow’s eyes.
For ordinary Ukrainians, the debate is not abstract. The length and strength of any guarantee affects whether they rebuild homes, reopen factories and send children back to schools near frontlines, or move permanently west. For investors looking at Ukraine’s eventual reconstruction, a formal, lengthy US commitment could be the difference between cautious interest and a flood of capital.