Security guarantees for Ukraine from the U.S., similar to NATO’s Article 5, are dangerous – WSJ

U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine modeled on NATO’s Article 5 could be dangerous, because they might either lead to a global war or prove empty—undermining confidence in the United States’ willingness to meet its commitments.

That’s what analysts Samuel Charap and Jennifer Kavanagh write in an article for The Washington Post.

In their view, the U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine currently being discussed in negotiations have several serious problems.

First, such guarantees rest on credibility and trust. Up to now, the United States has not wanted to deploy its troops to Ukraine or intervene directly in the war, because it does not see this as aligning with its vital national interests.

Second, if the United States fails to fulfill its obligations in the event of a new Russian invasion, that would cast doubt on the guarantees offered to all other countries that have similar arrangements with Washington.

Third, if the United States truly is prepared to go to war with Russia in order to honor guarantees to Ukraine, this could lead to nuclear escalation.

“Those who are cheering this development [the inclusion in a peace plan of guarantees based on the principle of NATO’s Article 5] should hold off on champagne toasts. This new plan has a problem: it promises too much. The Trump administration should prioritize narrower but credible commitments—closer to what the U.S. and its allies have been willing to do for Ukraine over the past four years—rather than sweeping commitments that seem generous but ultimately prove hollow and potentially dangerous,” the authors write.