Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Israel-Hamas
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
    • North Korea
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Europe and Eurasia / The problem with ‘peacekeepers’ in Ukraine
Europe and Eurasia, NATO, Russia, Ukraine, Ukraine‑Russia

February 26, 2025

The problem with ‘peacekeepers’ in Ukraine

By Peter Harris

Newly minted Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was being honest with Ukraine when he said the country will not return to its pre-2014 borders anytime soon. The same goes for his statements that Kyiv should not expect NATO membership as part of an agreement to end the war with Russia, and that the United States cannot be expected to shoulder the burden of supporting Ukraine going forward.

These were harsh realities for Ukrainians to hear, perhaps — but they are realities nonetheless. Hegseth’s candor is to be welcomed. But while the secretary of defense has gone a long way toward articulating a more realistic policy on Ukraine, it is important that one false hope is not exchanged for another.

In particular, President Donald Trump’s team should clarify what Hegseth meant when he said that “robust security guarantees” will be needed “to ensure that the war will not begin again.” To state the obvious: security is a hard thing to guarantee. It almost always requires the threat or use of force. But who will use force to uphold Ukraine’s postwar borders?

Hegseth seems to have accepted the inevitability of “peacekeepers” being tasked with implementing a future peace agreement. If true, however, this would be a concerning development. To be sure, Hegseth appeared to rule out U.S. participation in any peacekeeping force and rejected a role for NATO’s alliance structures. Instead, he referenced “capable European and non-European troops” as candidates for guaranteeing Ukraine’s postwar borders.

Read at Stars and Stripes

Author

Photo of Peter Harris

Peter
Harris

Non-Resident Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Europe

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Are the Russia-Ukraine Peace Talks Going Anywhere?

By Daniel DePetris

June 3, 2025

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Drones, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Drone attack may do Ukraine more harm than good

By Jennifer Kavanagh

June 2, 2025

In the mediaUkraine‑Russia, Drones, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Daniel Davis on NBC News discusses Ukraine’s recent drone attacks inside Russia

Featuring Daniel Davis

June 2, 2025

In the mediaUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Why Trump can’t get ‘crazy’ Putin to end the war

Featuring Rajan Menon

May 29, 2025

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Is Trump’s unified Republican front fracturing over Russia?

By Daniel DePetris

May 28, 2025

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, NATO, Russia, Ukraine

Putin would be foolish to attack Nato

By Jennifer Kavanagh

May 27, 2025

Events on Europe and Eurasia

See All Events
virtualUkraine‑Russia, Air power, Diplomacy, Drones, Europe and Eurasia, Land power, Military analysis, Russia, Ukraine

Past Virtual Event: Ukraine’s critical choice: Pursue peace or fight on

April 16, 2025
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

Past Virtual Event: China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Past Virtual Event: Trump and Ukraine: Prolonging or ending the war

December 13, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved