At the EU summit taking place these days, the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell, will present to the leaders of the countries a draft of long-term commitments to Ukraine in the security and defense sector.
According to ZN.UA, the contents of the document generally correspond to the points previously published by Bloomberg. Among other things, they envisage a long-term mechanism for military assistance to Ukraine; providing training for Ukrainian soldiers; cooperation with the Ukrainian defense industry; supporting nuclear safety efforts; assistance in mine clearance; sharing intelligence and satellite imagery; development of cyber potential; assistance in implementing reform programs, etc.
After the document receives political support at the European Council summit, it will become an addition to similar bilateral agreements between Kyiv and individual member countries of the European Union - Germany, Italy, France.
Since the end of summer, Deputy Head of the Presidential Office Igor Zhovkva has been negotiating with representatives of the G7 countries on bilateral agreements on providing our country with comprehensive military and economic assistance. This work is being carried out by the OP within the framework of the long-term “porcupine strategy” proposed by the West to contain Russia, which, at the suggestion of Western partners, our country is trying to implement for the period before joining NATO and a possible freezing of the war with the Russian Federation.
In Kyiv these agreements are called “security guarantees”. Just a few months ago, the Ukrainian capital expected that the first of them would be signed at the end of this year. It is now clear that this goal will not be achieved. Therefore, the OP set a new benchmark for themselves - to sign the first documents before February 24. But doubts arise that by this date Vladimir Zelensky will be able to sign at least one document: according to informed interlocutors of ZN.UA, “one gets the impression that no one wants to be first. Everyone is looking at the United States, but Washington is in no hurry.”
Nevertheless, the first drafts have already been prepared. At the same time, according to ZN.UA sources, it is not yet known what the documents being prepared will be called - agreements (as the Ukrainian side insists) or joint declarations (the position of our partners). As for the content, the texts will be of the same type, but not identical: they declare long-term assistance to Ukraine in matters of security and defense, financial, economic and technical support, and assistance in European integration.
These documents being prepared are consistent in content with the above-mentioned draft of the EU's long-term commitments in the security and defense sector.
In particular, it is planned to provide training and training for the Ukrainian armed forces; deepening cooperation with the Ukrainian defense industry; strengthening Ukraine’s ability to counter cyber and hybrid threats; support for defense sector reforms; intelligence sharing; mine clearance assistance. The partners also declare participation in the restoration of Ukraine, including critical and social infrastructure. At the same time, they are trying to emphasize participation in the restoration of our country after the end of the war , which does not suit Kiev.
Despite the insistence of the Ukrainian side, our partners diligently avoid using the word “guarantees” in documents. However, only a few of them use the word “commitments”. And there is definitely no obligation in the document for the signatories to send soldiers to Ukraine for protection against Russia. Therefore, although Bankova constantly calls these documents “agreements on security guarantees,” they have nothing to do with guarantees providing for mutual defense, but only imply strengthening the defense capability of Ukraine, which should increase the cost of aggression for Russia.
As noted in a comment to ZN.UA, Associate Professor of the Department of International Law at the Institute of International Relations of the KNU named after. T. Shevchenko Zakhar Tropin, “in international law, it does not matter what the document is called - “guarantees”, “agreement”, “memorandum” or “joint declaration”. Its content and the wording of the provisions are important. In order for such a document to ensure the security of Ukraine, it must contain specific obligations of the parties and ways to ensure their implementation.”
But this is only one side of the problem of future agreements. The other is whether the leaders have the political will to implement the signed agreements. Because if it is absent, then the parties will not fulfill their obligations, even if the agreement stipulates mutual defense.
For example, the obligation of the signatory countries to hold consultations, stated in Article 6 of the Budapest Memorandum , was never fulfilled by London and Washington, despite the efforts made by Kiev last spring: the partners simply ignored our appeal. And amid Russia's invasion of Ukraine in recent years, doubts are growing that NATO leaders will agree to invoke Article 5 of the Washington Treaty to protect even the Baltic countries from Russian aggression.
Apparently, our partners intend to take on as few obligations as possible. And as preparation progresses, the document becomes emasculated, acquiring increasingly general formulations. According to ZN.UA, in the current projects under discussion there are no clear obligations to provide Ukraine with military equipment, equipment, and shells. Although the Ukrainian side insists on recording material and technical assistance to the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the document, our partners limit themselves to only general phrases about “support in equipment.”
It is also unknown whether future documents will provide for a mechanism for crisis consultations between Ukraine and signatory countries.
Therefore, when the president’s office recalls the Budapest Memorandum with “an undeniable, quiet word” for its lack of effective security guarantees, Bankovaya is simultaneously driving itself into a trap, constantly calling the projects under discussion “agreements on security guarantees.” By selling goods to Ukrainians under someone else’s label, the OP, although delaying disappointment among our citizens, cultivates false expectations among them. Over time, this will hurt the reputation of the Ukrainian authorities and will negatively affect Zelensky’s rating.
