The United States is doubling down on its support for Ukraine with a new long-term security deal, to be unveiled at this week’s G-7 summit in Italy. The 10-year deal commits Washington to supporting the Ukrainian military long-term, according to U.S. officials, and comes ahead of a contentious U.S. presidential election that has unnerved European allies over the prospect of former President Donald Trump’s reelection.
The United States is doubling down on its support for Ukraine with a new long-term security deal, to be unveiled at this week’s G-7 summit in Italy. The 10-year deal commits Washington to supporting the Ukrainian military long-term, according to U.S. officials, and comes ahead of a contentious U.S. presidential election that has unnerved European allies over the prospect of former President Donald Trump’s reelection.
As part of the deal, the United States will continue to help train Ukraine’s forces and provide them with weapons. Importantly, unlike NATO’s Article 5 mutual defense clause, the U.S.-Ukraine security pact does not require Washington to send U.S. forces to defend Ukraine in the event of a future attack; however, it does commit Washington to hold high-level consultations with Kyiv within 24 hours of any future attacks.
The agreement would also not be a formal binding treaty, which leaves the door open for Trump to potentially pull out of the deal if he returns to the White House.
The pact is one of at least 31 bilateral security agreements that various countries have signed or are slated to sign with Ukraine in the coming months. Western officials tout these agreements as a sign of their countries’ enduring commitment to help Ukraine in its war against Russia, but Ukraine’s strongest supporters say those bilateral arrangements can’t replace Kyiv’s ultimate goal of joining NATO.
The new arrangement is also part of a raft of measures that are aimed at “Trump-proofing” the NATO and Western commitment to Ukraine—including the alliance establishing a common defense fund for Ukraine worth billions of dollars—though it’s unclear how effective those arrangements would be if Trump regains office.
“No one really wants to be fighting Russia 10 years from now, but a sense of short-termism or an ephemeral commitment from the United States should be banished through the format of this agreement,” said Kristine Berzina, an expert on the U.S. security posture and U.S.-European Union strategic ties at the German Marshall Fund of the United States.
It’s unclear what exactly Trump’s approach to Ukraine would be if he won. Trump hasn’t specified what his Ukraine strategy would look like, leaving room for doubts over U.S. commitments to what many NATO allies see as an existential war for European security. Trump has pushed Europe to take on more of the burden of defending Ukraine against Russia and said he would encourage the Russians to do “whatever the hell they want” if European NATO allies don’t meet their 2 percent defense spending targets. “Even a treaty doesn’t necessarily seem good enough as a guarantee in a Trump administration,” Berzina said.
However, Trump notably dropped his opposition to Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson’s effort to push through a major national security funding package that included billions of dollars of military aid to Ukraine—thereby allowing the package, which had been stalled for months due at least in part to his previous objections, to finally pass.
“While the loudest supporters of Trump in Congress and in the media are talking about ending American support for Ukraine, Trump has been notably silent on that,” said John Herbst, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine now at the Atlantic Council. “He essentially gave a yellow light, if not a green light, for Johnson to push the aid package through.”
The new security deal is also meant to send a few other messages. “It’s primarily a signaling effort to show Russia and China in particular that the G-7 remains united in its bid to stay in this for as long as it takes,” said Emily Benson, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the director of its Project on Trade and Technology. It’s also partly an attempt by the Biden administration at “reaffirming leadership” in the wake of limited but impactful far-right party gains in last week’s European Parliament elections that could chip away at European support for Ukraine, she added. “So I think an additional effort to provide security guarantees is good and anticipated.”
Leaders at the G-7 summit are also expected to condemn the Kremlin’s growing ties with North Korea and warn Chinese banks that they will face more Western sanctions if they help Russia evade sanctions, as Foreign Policy reported.
Perhaps most notably, the G-7 will also announce a new initiative to grant $50 billion in loans to Ukraine, funded by the interest on seized Russian assets in Western banks. That loan agreement is likely to be more impactful and longer lasting, although several logistical and legal questions over its implementation still remain.
And though the new U.S.-Ukraine security agreement and those Kyiv has signed with other European countries fall well short of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s ultimate goal of joining NATO, they do seem like a step in that direction. “This agreement is part of what the administration has been calling Ukraine’s bridge to NATO,” Berzina said. “There are concrete steps that when put together will make Ukraine ready to join NATO.”
The post Biden and the G-7 Seek to Reassure Ukraine appeared first on Foreign Policy.
