European capitals have reacted with skepticism to the Trump administration's proposed European security framework, warning that discussions with Russia over the continent's future architecture risk emboldening Moscow and sidelining Europe, as the White House prepares for trilateral peace talks with Ukraine and Russia in Abu Dhabi next week.
The proposal, outlined by presidential envoy Jared Kushner on November 5, includes permanent security consultations, crisis communications, greater military transparency, reciprocal measures to reduce escalation risks, and an enduring framework for long-term European security and stability. Kushner said the initiative would respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of every country, with no state having a veto over another's security choices or alliances, and that NATO would remain central to collective defense.
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said Friday: “We already have a European security architecture in place — NATO and European Union both have their respective roles. We must make sure Ukraine is integrated into this architecture. The problem remains that Russia keeps breaking the treaties that underpin it … Putin does not have a veto over European security.”
POLITICO spoke to 12 NATO diplomats, EU envoys and European government officials, all of whom were granted anonymity to speak freely on the sensitive issue. One NATO diplomat said: “It is a bit obscure what Kushner meant,” adding that “any discussion with Russia on the future architecture at the moment will just be used by Moscow to legitimize their arguments … it will not fly with the European allies.”
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk told reporters: "We must be realistic about the peace talks and we must be very careful when it comes to the real intentions of Russia. In winter, Putin might have less incentives to get a deal."
Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda added: "Europe must have a seat at the table in negotiations on peace in Ukraine and the future European security architecture."
The plan also prompted questions from Russia specialists. Glen Howard, president of the Saratoga Foundation, told RFE/RL that the reference to a broader European security architecture was particularly concerning, given remarks by a Kremlin foreign-policy adviser last week calling for a return to NATO's pre-1997 posture. “Since when does Russia get a say about the future of NATO and undoing the eastern flank?” he asked.
John Herbst, a former US ambassador to Ukraine, said the challenge was to devise security guarantees strong enough to reassure Kyiv but not so extensive that Russia rejects a settlement. “That's an impossible task,” he told RFE/RL, arguing that Russia does not want serious security guarantees for Ukraine, while Kyiv needs them for its survival as an independent state.
The trilateral US-Ukraine-Russia discussions are scheduled for November 10-11 in Abu Dhabi, the first such peace talks since February, according to Kushner. Mark Temnycky of the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center said he expected incremental progress but no breakthrough, citing territorial disputes and Ukraine's postwar security as the main obstacles.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The proposal could reshape European security architecture and potentially alter NATO's posture, affecting millions.
- It comes as the US seeks a peace deal with Russia while European allies feel excluded.
- The outcome of Abu Dhabi talks may determine the future of Ukraine and security balances in Europe.
Background
The Trump administration has been pushing for a negotiated end to Russia's war in Ukraine. After Trump's meeting with Putin's envoy Kirill Dmitriev, Kushner unveiled a plan linking Ukraine's security guarantees to a broader European security framework. The plan has been met with unease in European capitals, which caution against negotiating with Russia while the war continues.
Key Perspectives
Kaja Kallas (EU foreign policy chief): said the existing architecture of NATO and EU is sufficient, and that Putin does not have a veto over European security.
NATO diplomats (anonymous): warned that discussing future architecture with Russia could legitimize Moscow's arguments and would not be accepted by allies.
Donald Tusk (Polish PM): urged realism about peace talks and noted Putin may have less incentive to agree in winter.
Gitanas Nausėda (Lithuanian President): insisted Europe must have a seat at the table on Ukraine peace and future security.
Glen Howard (Saratoga Foundation): called the plan's reference to broader security architecture concerning, questioning whether Russia should have a say in NATO's posture.
John Herbst (former US ambassador to Ukraine): described the task of crafting acceptable security guarantees as "impossible" given Russian and Ukrainian positions.
Mark Temnycky (Atlantic Council): predicted only incremental progress in Abu Dhabi, citing territorial disputes and security guarantees as main obstacles.
What to Watch
- The outcome of the November 10-11 Abu Dhabi trilateral talks.
- The informal EU leaders meeting in Dublin next week, where Ukraine is expected to overshadow the agenda.
- The US review of American troop posture in Europe, expected in December.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 2 sources: 12 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedEurope is skeptical of the White House’s proposed European security framework.Politico Europe: “An opaque Trump administration proposal for a new European-wide security arrangement with Russia has met skepticism from European capitals”
- SupportedEuropean officials warn that the plan risks sidelining Europe.Politico Europe: “European capitals that fear it risks sidelining the continent and emboldening Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin.”
- SupportedThe opening says discussions with Russia about Europe’s future security architecture risk emboldening Moscow and sidelining Europe.Politico Europe: “An opaque Trump administration proposal for a new European-wide security arrangement with Russia has met skepticism from European capitals that fear it risks sidelining the continent and emboldening Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin.”
- SupportedKushner outlined the proposal on November 5, and it includes permanent consultations, crisis communications, greater military transparency, reciprocal measures to reduce escalation risks, and a long-term European security framework.RFE/RL: “Jared Kushner detailed the initiative in a November 5 social media post [...] The proposed framework includes permanent security consultations, crisis communications, greater military transparency, reciprocal measures to reduce escalation risks, and a long-term arrangement for European security and stability.”
- SupportedKaja Kallas said Europe already has a security architecture, Ukraine must be integrated into it, Russia keeps breaking the underpinning treaties, and Putin has no veto over European security.Politico Europe: ““We already have a European security architecture in place — NATO and European Union both have their respective roles,” EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said Friday in reaction to the U.S. plan. “We must make sure Ukraine is integrated into this architecture. The problem remains that Russia keeps breaking the treaties that underpin it … Putin does not have a veto over European security.””
- SupportedPOLITICO spoke to 12 NATO diplomats, EU envoys and European government officials, all granted anonymity to speak freely on the issue.Politico Europe: “POLITICO spoke to 12 NATO diplomats, EU envoys and European government officials, all of whom were granted anonymity to speak freely on the sensitive issue.”
- SupportedA NATO diplomat called Kushner’s meaning obscure and said discussions with Russia could legitimize Moscow’s arguments and would not fly with European allies.Politico Europe: ““It is a bit obscure what Kushner meant,” said one NATO diplomat. “The general sentiment in Europe is that any discussion with Russia on the future architecture at the moment will just be used by Moscow to legitimize their arguments … it will not fly with the European allies.””
- SupportedDonald Tusk urged realism and caution about Russia’s intentions, saying Putin might have less incentive to reach a deal in winter.Politico Europe: ““We must be realistic about the peace talks and we must be very careful when it comes to the real intentions of Russia,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk told a group of reporters, including from POLITICO, earlier this week. “In winter, Putin might have less incentives to get a deal.””
- SupportedGitanas Nausėda said Europe must have a seat at negotiations on peace in Ukraine and the future European security architecture.Politico Europe: ““Europe must have a seat at the table in negotiations on peace in Ukraine and the future European security architecture,” Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda added Friday”
- SupportedGlen Howard said the reference to a broader European security architecture was concerning and asked, “Since when does Russia get a say about the future of NATO and undoing the eastern flank?”RFE/RL: “But Howard said the reference to a broader European security architecture was particularly concerning. [...] “Since when does Russia get a say about the future of NATO and undoing the eastern flank?” Howard asked”
- SupportedJohn Herbst said devising guarantees strong enough to reassure Kyiv but not so extensive that Russia rejects a settlement was “an impossible task.”RFE/RL: “The challenge, he said, was to devise guarantees strong enough to reassure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy but not so extensive that Russia rejected a settlement. “That’s an impossible task,” Herbst told RFE/RL”
- SupportedThe trilateral discussions are scheduled for November 10–11 in Abu Dhabi and are the first such peace talks since February, according to Kushner.RFE/RL: “The trilateral US-Ukraine-Russia discussions are scheduled for November 10-11 and will be the first such peace talks since February, according to Kushner.”