The U.S. has offered Ukraine security guarantees modeled after NATO's

The United States has offered Ukraine security guarantees that, in scope, are intended to correspond to Article 5 of the NATO Treaty. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy made this announcement on October 20. According to him, several options for Ukraine’s protection were discussed during the negotiations. Among them are guarantees based on the principle of NATO’s collective defense. The relevant proposals are set forth in documents that the U.S. side plans to submit to Russia. “We discussed various proposals: NATO, Article 5, guarantees similar to Article 5. There are various security guarantees that exist on paper, in a document, which Steve will convey to the Russians, and we will hear their response in a day,” Zelenskyy said.

U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff is scheduled to travel to St. Petersburg on October 21. There, he plans to present Washington’s proposals regarding Ukraine to Russian leaders. Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gar Støre said that during his visit, Witkoff will also present the main ideas discussed at the meeting in Oslo. According to him, the U.S. representative will try to lay the groundwork for a meeting between the two countries’ leaders.

At the same time, it remains unclear exactly what commitments the U.S. is prepared to make and how these guarantees would apply in the event of a new Russian attack. Zelenskyy did not disclose any details of the document. As of this writing, neither the Kremlin nor the White House had commented on his statement.

What Does Article 5 of the NATO Treaty Mean?

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty concerns collective defense. It stipulates that an armed attack against one of the Alliance’s member states is considered an attack against all of its members. In such a case, every NATO member state must come to the aid of the country under attack. At the same time, the treaty does not oblige all members to automatically enter the war: each ally determines for itself what actions it deems necessary, including whether to use military force.

That is precisely why “Article 5-level” guarantees do not necessarily mean full NATO membership for Ukraine. Their actual effectiveness will depend on specific conditions, the scope of partners’ commitments, and mechanisms for responding to potential aggression.

It is currently unknown whether the U.S. proposals include automatic military assistance to Ukraine, arms supplies, intelligence sharing, or other forms of support. Nor has it been disclosed for how long any potential guarantees would remain in effect or how they are planned to be legally enshrined.

The U.S. has resumed sharing intelligence with Ukraine

During his conversation with journalists, Zelenskyy also announced the resumption of U.S. intelligence sharing. According to him, Ukraine can once again receive timely information about Russian ballistic missile launches.

This data is essential for early warning of danger. It helps promptly inform the public about the threat and allows them to prepare for a possible strike. “We are grateful that the intelligence is working. I’m referring to the early warning system, which is very important for our people—children, adults, and villagers—because it allows us to know when ballistic missiles are approaching. So we’re grateful to the U.S. side. Now it’s working,” the president said.

Zelenskyy also stated that restrictions on the operation of Starlink satellite communication terminals should be lifted. According to him, they should be back to normal operation within 48 hours.

Starlink is of vital importance to the Ukrainian military, as it provides communication on the front lines, particularly between units and command. The restoration of terminal operations and the transmission of intelligence data may facilitate the execution of combat missions, but this alone does not signify a final resolution of the differences between Kyiv and Washington.

Zelenskyy Again Proposed an Energy Ceasefire

Separately, the Ukrainian president mentioned the energy ceasefire proposed by Donald Trump. Zelenskyy confirmed that Ukraine is ready to halt strikes on Russian energy infrastructure if Russia does the same.

According to him, Kyiv is ready for reciprocal steps, but not for unilateral restrictions. This approach requires both sides to simultaneously cease attacks on relevant targets. There is no confirmation yet that Russia has agreed to these terms. Therefore, the issue of an energy ceasefire remains open.

What European Leaders Are Saying

Finnish President Alexander Stubb also commented on the talks in Oslo. He stated that, in his opinion, the situation regarding the search for peace has improved, and expressed hope for further progress. Stubb mentioned the visit by Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner scheduled for October 21. He hopes that the negotiations will not result in further setbacks and will help move toward an agreement.

At the same time, the positive assessments by European leaders do not mean that the parties have already agreed on the terms for ending the war. Once the U.S. proposals are conveyed to Russia, it will become clearer whether Moscow is ready to discuss the proposed guarantees and under what conditions.

The talks are taking place amid pressure on Ukraine

The day before, on October 20, The Washington Post published an article about Donald Trump’s negotiations with Vladimir Putin and the pressure being exerted on Ukraine to reach a peace agreement. According to an analyst interviewed by the publication, the U.S. president is in a hurry to reach an agreement to end the war and may demand that Kyiv make concessions to Russia.

The article also mentioned a desire to conclude an agreement by December 2026, when the G20 summit is scheduled to take place in Miami. However, this is a description of plans and assessments, not a confirmed date for the conclusion of the negotiations. Previously, experts commenting to Ukrainian media expressed concerns that, as part of a potential agreement, Ukraine might be pressured to make territorial concessions—particularly regarding the Donbas—in exchange for security guarantees. However, it is unknown whether the current U.S. proposals contain such conditions.

The main question now is whether the stated guarantees will translate into concrete commitments that will truly help protect Ukraine from a new attack. The answer will depend on the content of the documents, Russia’s position, and the willingness of the U.S. and other partners to fulfill their promises.