U.S. President Donald Trump is actively pushing for a settlement to end the war in Ukraine, holding talks with both Kyiv and Moscow. Europeans fear that any agreement driven primarily by Washington could prioritize U.S.-Russia strategic and economic interests at the expense of Europe’s security. While Ukraine and parts of the U.S. plan were amended to be less pro-Russian, a final deal is still expected to carry significant risks for the continent. Europe has limited influence on negotiations, with no representatives at the latest U.S.-Ukraine talks in Florida, and will only observe upcoming meetings, including U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff’s engagement with President Vladimir Putin.
Why It Matters
European leaders are concerned that a U.S.-brokered deal could undermine NATO’s credibility, reward Russian aggression, and weaken Europe’s influence over regional security. The prospect of Russia retaining Ukrainian territory, combined with potential economic cooperation with Washington, could embolden Moscow to pursue further military objectives beyond Ukraine. The uncertainty also raises questions about the durability of U.S. commitments to European security, from nuclear guarantees to troop deployments, leaving allies anxious about future threats.
Europe is heavily invested in Ukraine’s defence, having contributed over €180 billion in aid, yet remains sidelined in critical peace discussions. NATO allies, particularly in Eastern Europe, face direct security risks and fear renewed Russian aggression. The United States is leading negotiations with the aim of securing a deal, balancing support for Ukraine against the prospect of opening economic and strategic cooperation with Russia. Ukraine risks losing territory and influence in negotiations it is not fully part of. Russia stands to gain recognition of its territorial gains, access to Western markets, and long-term strategic leverage in Europe.
What’s Next
Europe is likely to attempt measures to influence the outcome through initiatives like the “coalition of the willing,” a limited reassurance force led by France and Britain, and proposals to deploy frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine’s stability. Diplomatic efforts will also continue within NATO to strengthen deterrence and reinforce commitments. Nevertheless, without greater investment in hard power, Europe’s ability to shape the final settlement remains constrained, and the continent may largely have to accept terms shaped by U.S.-Russia negotiations.
Implications
A deal perceived as favoring Russia could destabilize Europe’s security architecture and embolden Moscow to challenge NATO allies in the future. Economic cooperation between the U.S. and Russia could also undermine sanctions regimes, providing Moscow with resources to rebuild its military. Europe’s limited role in shaping the settlement highlights the strategic vulnerability of the continent and the urgent need for greater defence capability, coordination, and diplomatic leverage. Failure to address these gaps may leave Europe increasingly reliant on U.S. decisions, even when they conflict with European security interests.
Analysis
Europe is in a precarious position. Despite its financial and logistical support for Ukraine, the continent lacks the hard power to influence peace negotiations meaningfully. Trump’s push for a deal, framed by “great-power logic,” risks prioritizing U.S. and Russian interests over Europe’s security. The implication is stark: without urgent investment in military capability and unified strategic action, Europe may be forced to accept a settlement that rewards Russian aggression, undermines NATO credibility, and leaves the continent exposed to future crises.
With information from Reuters.
