https://sputnikglobe.com/20250819/whos-ready-to-die-for-kiev-expert-debunks-wests-empty-promises-on-ukraine-security-guarantees-1122650367.html
‘Who’s Ready to Die for Kiev?’ Expert Debunks West’s Empty Promises on Ukraine Security Guarantees
‘Who’s Ready to Die for Kiev?’ Expert Debunks West’s Empty Promises on Ukraine Security Guarantees
Sputnik International
American University of Paris Professor Hall Gardner warns that NATO and EU security pledges are “wishful thinking”—and calls for a new approach involving Russia.
2025-08-19T12:25+0000
2025-08-19T12:25+0000
2025-08-19T12:30+0000
analysis
nato
european union (eu)
the united nations (un)
ukraine
promises
guarantees
https://cdn1.img.sputnikglobe.com/img/105124/34/1051243418_0:0:4800:2700_1920x0_80_0_0_afcce8e33853494d0023b031402e8ca4.jpg
In a candid interview with Sputnik, Professor Hall Gardner, chair of the Department of International and Comparative Politics at the American University of Paris, systematically dismantled the feasibility of Western security proposals currently being advanced in diplomatic circles.The Illusion of Security GuaranteesProfessor Gardner highlighted several fundamental flaws in the Western approach:NATO Article 5 is “wishful thinking”: Extending the alliance’s mutual defense clause to Ukraine is politically untenable—even within the US.Under the UN Security Council: Sending troops to Ukraine to “guarantee” security is a formula that can be conceived only under a UN Security Council resolution requesting it and fixing its rules of engagement. Such a perspective is currently very much hypothetical.The Only Viable Path: A New European Security ArchitectureRather than recycle failed models, Gardner proposes a realistic—if politically difficult—alternative: a trilateral security framework negotiated between the EU, the US, and Russia.Within this new system, Ukraine—as an EU candidate country—could be granted credible security assurances without triggering escalation with Moscow.Empty Promises, Real Consequences Gardner warns that continuing to offer Ukraine security guarantees that cannot be implemented does more than mislead—it prolongs suffering and instability.
https://sputnikglobe.com/20250818/zelenskyy-on-election-in-ukraine-this-to-require-security-conditions-1122646646.html
https://sputnikglobe.com/20250818/security-guarantees-for-ukraine-do-not-require-deployment-of-us-troops--us-nato-envoy-1122646040.html
https://sputnikglobe.com/20250724/zelenskys-anti-corruption-reform-destroys-ukraines-deals-with-west-1122482081.html
ukraine
Sputnik International
feedback@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
2025
Sputnik International
feedback@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
News
en_EN
Sputnik International
feedback@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
Sputnik International
feedback@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
nato and eu security pledges, security guarantees for ukraine, new european security architecture, trilateral dialogue with the us and russia
nato and eu security pledges, security guarantees for ukraine, new european security architecture, trilateral dialogue with the us and russia
‘Who’s Ready to Die for Kiev?’ Expert Debunks West’s Empty Promises on Ukraine Security Guarantees
12:25 GMT 19.08.2025 (Updated: 12:30 GMT 19.08.2025) American University of Paris Professor Hall Gardner warns that NATO and EU security pledges are “wishful thinking”—and calls for a new approach involving Russia.
In a candid interview with Sputnik, Professor Hall Gardner, chair of the Department of International and Comparative Politics at the American University of Paris, systematically dismantled the feasibility of Western security proposals currently being advanced in diplomatic circles.
“Behind the choreography displayed in Washington meetings—the ‘collective West’ on one side, Russia on the other—there is little substance,” said Gardner. “The question that remains unanswered is: who is ready to die for Kiev?”
The Illusion of Security Guarantees
Professor Gardner highlighted several fundamental flaws in the Western approach:
NATO Article 5 is “wishful thinking”: Extending the alliance’s mutual defense clause to Ukraine is politically untenable—even within the US.
EU Article 42.7 is “dead on arrival”: While the EU treaty offers a form of collective security, it explicitly refers to NATO—making it unacceptable to Russia.
Under the UN Security Council: Sending troops to Ukraine to “guarantee” security is a formula that can be conceived only under a UN Security Council resolution requesting it and fixing its rules of engagement. Such a perspective is currently very much hypothetical.
“Russia will not accept any involvement of NATO as an organization and will not tolerate armed forces from any NATO country,” Gardner emphasized.
The Only Viable Path: A New European Security Architecture
Rather than recycle failed models, Gardner proposes a realistic—if politically difficult—alternative: a trilateral security framework negotiated between the EU, the US, and Russia.
“The only option that may have some credibility is a declaration demanding the reconstruction of a long-term collective European security architecture,” he explained. “Such a process should be promoted by the EU in a trilateral dialogue with the US and Russia.”
Within this new system, Ukraine—as an EU candidate country—could be granted credible security assurances without triggering escalation with Moscow.
Empty Promises, Real Consequences
Gardner warns that continuing to offer Ukraine security guarantees that cannot be implemented does more than mislead—it prolongs suffering and instability.
“Despite efforts to show unity between Europe and the US, deep differences remain about what concrete availability each country would be capable of and is willing to offer to Ukraine,” he concluded.
