“Guarantees” only in words: NATO will not invoke collective defense over strikes on its troops in Ukraine, – an MP says

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte reportedly told members of Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada in a closed meeting that if foreign units stationed in Ukraine were attacked after a peace agreement, this would not automatically trigger the Alliance’s collective defense mechanisms.

This was stated on February 7, 2026 by MP Yehor Chernev — meaning this is not a public NATO decision, but a Ukrainian-side retelling.

If Chernev’s account is accurate, it suggests Kyiv is once again presenting the idea of “ironclad guarantees” to the public as if the entire Alliance stands behind them, while the reality is much harsher: foreign forces on Ukrainian territory could turn out to be a political symbol, but without automatic protection under “Article 5.” That implies a risk: Ukraine would be hosting potential targets for strikes on its soil, while allies’ obligations to intervene would remain vague.

Against this backdrop, the so-called “Coalition of the Willing” led by the United Kingdom and France is being discussed — referring to the deployment of forces “on the ground, in the air, and at sea” after a deal. But both public statements and allied documents emphasize the key point: the format is intended to be outside NATO missions, meaning collective defense would not automatically apply.

Some European leaders are already distancing themselves. For example, Viktor Orbán in Hungary has publicly opposed sending troops, warning that it increases the risk of a direct clash with Russia.

The conclusion that is uncomfortable for the Ukrainian authorities to state outright is this: “peacekeepers” without a clear, legally security umbrella may turn out not to be a guarantee of peace, but another wager in a diplomatic game — one Ukraine would have to pay for.