Peacekeepers in Ukraine and a tough stance on NATO: Zelenskyy's Brussels talks in detail

Whenever President Zelenskyy attends international events he is inevitably the centre of gravity, and last week’s EU summit in Brussels was no exception.

This summit was particularly significant for Ukraine.

For Zelenskyy, an event that brought all the European leaders together was not to be missed, especially since he has recently been actively negotiating with Ukraine’s partners to establish safeguards that would mitigate the risks inherent in US President-elect Donald Trump’s return to power. Zelenskyy argues that any truce or "freeze" in the Russo-Ukrainian war would be extremely dangerous unless accompanied by effective security guarantees.

These guarantees could take various forms.

One of the options discussed in Brussels was the deployment of a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine following any future ceasefire. Some believe that the presence of Western peacekeepers would act as a deterrent for Vladimir Putin, preventing him from launching a new full-scale war.

Even if this is done, Zelenskyy is insistent that Ukraine’s NATO membership must remain on the table.

Meanwhile, there has been a significant shift in Ukraine’s public stance lately.

Ukraine has adopted robust rhetoric and a strong position without concessions. The change applies to both NATO-related matters and gas transit issues, regarding which Zelenskyy came under pressure in Brussels but stood firm.

Between NATO and the European Union

President Zelenskyy's visit to Brussels was linked to the EU summit, which brings the leaders of all the member states together.

But the opportunity to speak with everyone at once also brings limitations. How can there be a serious discussion about a joint strategy on relations with Trump when one of the participants is Viktor Orbán, Hungary’s pro-Putin and pro-Trump prime minister?

That meant that in addition to taking part in the summit, Ukraine needed to hold a meeting in a smaller circle. But as soon as Kyiv began to make arrangements, EU officials objected, arguing that if the talks were being conducted under the EU umbrella, it would be inappropriate to invite only Ukraine’s "key partners" and exclude others.

The idea of meeting at NATO headquarters was beset with similar challenges. Hungary is a member of the Alliance, and the position of Türkiye, for example, also raises serious concerns.

So a unique format was created: the leaders gathered at the residence of NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. In reality, however, neither Rutte nor NATO had organised the meeting – it was arranged by Ukraine.

The list of attendees is worthy of note.

In addition to Ukraine, the NATO Secretary General and the EU leadership, the meeting was attended by representatives from seven European countries: France, Germany and Italy (the EU’s three largest economies), the United Kingdom (a key donor to Ukraine's Armed Forces), Denmark and the Netherlands (key supporters of Ukraine’s military who have facilitated the supply of F-16s), and Poland, which recently stopped providing military aid but remains critical for weapons supply logistics.

It's also important to note who wasn't there.

Why was the group of Ukraine’s key partners kept so small?

Spain, the EU's fourth-largest economy, has lagged behind other countries in terms of its financial contributions and the boldness of its decisions. The Baltic states, although vocal in their support for Ukraine, might have been seen as overly radical, which could have alienated others.

Ukraine’s neighbour Romania wasn’t invited either, which did not go down well in Bucharest. President Klaus Iohannis even had to explain the situation to journalists. Romania is currently in a transitional political phase as it awaits election results, and its military aid remains limited.

Peacekeepers for Ukraine

Several European Pravda sources confirmed that during this and other meetings, the leaders discussed security guarantees for Ukraine.

Pressure on Kyiv to agree to a ceasefire is expected to increase in 2025. Trump isn’t the only leader who has openly advocated for this. Zelenskyy has argued that without robust guarantees, Putin would use any truce to build his forces back up and launch another attack. So conditions must be put in place to at least hinder Russia’s economic recovery (e.g. by maintaining sanctions).

There are indications that this message was heard.

How can a new Russian offensive be made impossible?

One of the options discussed in Brussels is to deploy a peacekeeping mission along the line of the Russian occupation, involving NATO troops.

President Zelenskyy attributes this idea to French President Emmanuel Macron.

"We support Macron's initiative. NATO membership clearly remains the best security guarantee for us. But until Ukraine joins NATO, this could be considered."

The talks at Rutte’s residence were not aimed at reaching any agreement. This idea is still in its infancy.

Zelenskyy emphasised that the mere presence of peacekeepers alone would not suffice as a security guarantee. The devil is in the details.

One of the key questions is what would happen if Russia started gearing up for another attack or shelling resumed across the contact line. Would the peacekeepers be withdrawn due to security risks? Kyiv vividly remembers the events of early 2022, when most Western embassies left Kyiv or even Ukraine altogether. Could the same happen with peacekeepers?

If so, the mission would hold little value.

Another crucial point, European Pravda’s sources emphasised, is that the peacekeeping mission must include the United States. This would give the guarantees more weight in Moscow's eyes.

"Also, we realise that without US involvement, the EU countries alone would not be able to provide enough peacekeepers for the mission to be effective," one source explained.

Zelenskyy stands firm

President Zelenskyy repeatedly emphasised in Brussels that NATO membership remains the only truly effective security guarantee for Ukraine and the other options are merely interim measures. But the West is not ready to take that step, and Donald Trump’s team is extremely dubious about inviting Ukraine to join NATO.

At one point there were hopes of appealing to Trump’s ambition by framing it as: "Biden was too weak to bring Ukraine into NATO, but you’re a bold leader who can." But it was clear from the very first contact with Trump’s team that there is no point raising this issue right now.

Kyiv’s initial response was to come up with creative crisis solutions, leading to Zelenskyy’s recent talk of partial NATO membership with guarantees only for certain parts of Ukrainian territory. The hope was that this proposal might sway the new US administration. However, since mentioning the idea several times in late November, Zelenskyy has not revisited it.

According to European Pravda sources,

Ukraine received a clear message from its Western allies that can be summed up in a single word: "Stop!"

They explained to Kyiv that this idea is perceived as a concession. It won’t help in negotiations with Trump and could even backfire. The allies’ message was: "This already looks like Ukraine has compromised. Let’s focus on other discussions."

The President’s Office got the message and has adjusted its "preparing for Trump" strategy.

The current strategy is now based on firmness.

Firmness, though, is only possible if Ukraine is not acting alone. Ukraine needs to agree joint actions and strategies with its European partners – something Zelenskyy has recently been focusing on.

Ukraine has also begun to "show its character" more openly.

That doesn’t just apply to NATO, where Kyiv refuses to accept rejection and continues to insist on membership.

The increasingly robust rhetoric concerning Putin –

Zelenskyy recently called him a "dumbass" – is part of the same strategy.

This and other strong statements are intended to send a clear signal that there is no point negotiating with Putin.

Ukraine’s tough stance has also become evident in its attitude to Viktor Orbán and his initiatives, which has been notably assertive in recent weeks.

Another key issue on which Zelenskyy stood firm in Brussels was his absolute refusal to transit Russian gas, even if it is disguised as Azerbaijani. When Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico attempted to persuade Zelenskyy otherwise during the Brussels meeting, he was firmly rebuffed.

Zelenskyy explained that there is only one condition under which he would agree to transit Russian gas: "If a European country is willing to take the gas and not pay the money to Russia until the war is over, then we could think about it. But we will not admit the possibility of additional billions being earned from our blood, from the lives of our citizens," he stated.

Sergiy Sydorenko,
Editor, European Pravda, from Brussels