A US backstop for European peacekeepers in Ukraine could be packaged as protection of US citizens
And why Trump thinks US guarantees are unnecessary if he makes a deal with Putin
Perhaps the key reason Trump hasn’t so far offered US security guarantees to cover a Ukraine peace deal is that the deal is supposed to end US involvement in Ukraine’s security, not prolong it for an indefinite period.
But there is another reason too, based Trump’s view of international relations between great powers as essentially links and deals between their leaders sealed by face to face meetings and personal understandings.
Trump has often said that Putin would not have invaded Ukraine if he, Trump had been in office. Perhaps he has said it so often he has come to believe it. But more likely he does believe it.
What Trump is saying is that if he had told Putin that invading Ukraine was not something he, Trump wanted to happen, Putin would have backed off.
Why?
Partly because in Trump’s head Putin would have valued the understanding he had with Trump about the way the world works, and partly because Putin not have dared to cross Trump.
This attitude of Trump’s deeply colours his approach to bringing peace to Ukaine.
Trump admires Putin, both as an individual, and as the great-power role model he embodies- a strongman warlord who rules by ruthless personal fiat and shapes the politics of his neighbours - and of his own country - to suit his needs.
Trump does not believe Putin would cross him as long as he remains in the White House
If Trump and Putin make a deal about Ukraine, Trump believes that Putin will stick with it - at any rate as long as Trump is in the White House, and that is probably as far ahead as Trump cares about.
That timeframe could just conceivably stretch eight years into the future, because Trump’s plans may extend to a third term in office as President, despite a US Constitutional ban on a President serving a third term. Trump has learned that legal rules can be broken, worked around, and the resulting chaos turned to his advantage. His hopes for a third term may be part of the the reason he has refused to endorse JD Vance as his successor.
So what are the prospects for Trump giving US security guarantees if Russia and Ukraine agree to peace deal - which will surely mean Russia keeping all or virtually all of the Ukrainian territory which it holds to date?
A US security backstop is achievable
A US security backstop is not out of the question. Trump has latched onto Ukraine as a potential source for the US of much-needed rare earth minerals, and perhaps as a target for US property developers when the task of rebuilding Ukraine begins in earnest.
A preliminary deal on rare earths/minerals was expected to be signed by President Zelensky at the White House, provided Zelensky received assurances of US security guarantees. Instead Trump and Vice-President Vance exploded with indignation at Zelensky’s supposed lack of gratitude to the US, and his alleged preference for fighting on rather than making peace. In an unprecedented sequel - and to many on both sides of the Atlantic an outrageous one - the bemused Ukrainian President was told to leave the White House.
Since then President Zelensky, who believes he has nothing to apologise for, has expressed gratitude to the US (as he has on numerous previous occasions) and made it clear he wants to reset his relationship with Donald Trump. And that means agreeing to the minerals/rare earths agreement. Zelensky says he is ready to sign, but it is not clear whether his consent will still be subject to US security assurances, which to date have not been forthcoming.
Trump assumes a minerals deal means openings for US businesses
Trump clearly assumes that a minerals deal will open numerous opportunities for US businesses which will invest in Ukraine and have a significant presence there. Trump has said that Putin would hardly go back on a Ukraine peace deal if Ukraine was hosting American contractors come to take advantage of the Ukraine/US minerals agreement.
In this scenario US civilians would be engaged in minerals exploration and extraction, along no doubt with a range of associated business activities. Property development - and on a grand scale - could certainly be on the list if Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner showed as much interest in developing and reconstructing Ukraine as he did at one stage in developing Gaza.
A European coalition of the willing would need US backup
If a peace deal is made, Europe’s “coalition of the willing” , launched in London on 2 March by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer with the backing of French President Macron, would offer troops and air cover to provide reassurance to Ukraine’s armed forces and civilian population. Macron and Starmer have indicated that US security guarantees would be an essential precondition for a European reassurance force to be deployed.
European leaders could find influential political allies in US investors and US companies posting their people to Ukraine, who would also be lobbying for the security and stability that a US backup would provide.
US guarantees for US interests would play better at home than more support for European allies
From Trump’s perspective, offering US guarantees to protect US civilians, US business interests in Ukraine, and a source of valuable rare minerals for the US, would play better in MAGA circles than a narrative portraying Uncle Sam having to prop up the Europeans yet again.
This way of looking at things might give a useful steer to the way Starmer and Macron present their plans for the European reassurace package they are hoping to put together in aid of a Ukraine peace deal, and how they frame their arguments for what they see as essential US support.
Optics matter for Trump. But Zelensky and the European leaders who will support him in ensuring that any peace for Ukraine is a lasting one will want more than just optics - they will want strong US backing that they know they can count on.
Derrick Wyatt is an emeritus professor of law at the University of Oxford.