Where does a peace treaty leave Nato and Europe?

The Ukraine war, which has caused an estimated 700,000 Russian casualties and claimed around 100,000 Ukrainian lives, wounding a further 400,000 between the two countries, has reshaped Europe's security landscape, strained NATO's relevance and tested the continent's economic resilience. 

Here we explore the potential contours of a Trump-led peace deal, its implications for NATO and Europe's defence framework, and the broader geopolitical shifts it may unleash.

Setting the stage: A war-weary Europe and Trump's bold promise

The Russia-Ukraine war, ignited by Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022, has left a trail of devastation across Ukraine and beyond. Cities reduced to rubble, millions displaced, and a global economic fallout—marked by soaring energy prices and disrupted food supplies—have made the conflict the defining crisis of the decade. 

Enter President Trump, whose campaign pledge to end the war "swiftly" has evolved into a more nuanced commitment by early 2025. 

Reuters reported that Trump's advisers now anticipate a resolution taking "months or even longer," reflecting the complexity of negotiating with Russia's Vladimir Putin and Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

A US-brokered peace treaty could freeze the current front lines—where Russia controls about 20% of Ukraine, including Crimea and parts of the Donbas—and sideline Ukraine's long-standing ambition to join NATO. 

This pragmatic, if imperfect, ceasefire would aim to halt the bloodshed, but its implications stretch far beyond Ukraine's borders, challenging NATO's cohesion and forcing Europe to rethink its defence posture.

Implications for NATO: A reckoning deferred

Ukraine's pursuit of NATO membership has been a flashpoint of Russian aggression since Putin cited it as a justification for his 2022 invasion. At NATO's 2024 Washington Summit, allies reaffirmed Ukraine's "irreversible" path to membership, a promise that now hangs in the balance. 

According to Reuters, Trump's advisers favour tabling Ukraine's NATO bid indefinitely—a concession that could appease Putin but rattle the alliance's credibility. Daniel Treisman, in a 5 July 2024, Foreign Policy article, cautioned that admitting Kyiv post-war might "make both it and the West less secure," as Putin could test NATO's resolve through hybrid or direct aggression.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte highlighted the alliance's resilience at the 2024 summit: "In 2024 alone, investment by non-US Allies reached $485 billion …two-thirds of Allies now spending at least 2% of GDP on defence." Yet, a peace deal keeping Ukraine outside NATO could strain this unity. 

Trump's reported demand for NATO members to "dramatically increase their defence spending" while sustaining aid to Ukraine (BBC) hints at a shift in burden-sharing. If Europe resists, fissures within NATO could widen, especially if the US scales back its commitments under Trump's "America First" doctrine.

Ukrainian envoy Nataliia Galibarenko voiced Kyiv's frustration to NPR: "I always ask them, 'Why should [there] be something alternative invented specifically by or for Ukraine?'" Her concern underscores a fear that alternatives—bilateral pacts or peacekeeping missions—lack the deterrence of NATO's Article 5. Should NATO bow to Trump's deal, it risks appearing reactive rather than resolute, potentially emboldening Russia to probe weaker links in the alliance. 

Foreign Policy warns, "Russia may decide to launch a direct aggression against a NATO member to confirm the inoperability of the Euro-Atlantic security architecture," a scenario that could redefine NATO's purpose in the 21st century.

Europe's defence spending: A new era of self-reliance

A peace treaty sidelining Ukraine's NATO aspirations could jolt Europe into a new phase of military self-reliance, driven by fears of Russian resurgence. 

The Atlantic Council's Peter Dickinson noted that "bilateral security pacts could potentially serve as a solution… but any agreements would need to include firm commitments to defend Ukraine against a renewed Russian invasion." Without NATO's umbrella, Europe might bear this responsibility, pushing defence budgets higher.

President Zelenskyy warned at Davos on 21 January 2025, that Putin could return "with an army 10 times larger than now," amplifying the urgency. Europe's 2024 contribution of over 50 billion euros to Ukraine—surpassing NATO's 40-billion-euro pledge—signals a shift toward autonomy.

Deutsche Welle's analysis framed NATO's dilemma: "The alliance needs to decide how to strengthen its defences against Russia… and deal with an unpredictable US President Donald Trump." If Trump dials back US involvement, Europe might fast-track initiatives like the UK-France-Germany Trinity House Agreement, as proposed by the Foreign Policy Research Institute.

Konstantin Sonin of the University of Chicago doubted Putin's sincerity in a University Newsletter: "He's not really interested in meaningful talks… His goal is to subjugate Ukraine." 

This perception could drive Europe to exceed the 2% GDP defence spending benchmark, preparing for a future less reliant on American leadership. Politico.eu observed in 2024 that "the bloc is grappling with a need to increase defence spending," a trend poised to accelerate in 2025 as Europe braces for an uncertain security landscape.

The broader geopolitical canvas

Beyond NATO and Europe, a US-brokered peace deal could reshape global alliances. Freezing the conflict might stabilise energy and food markets—Brent crude could drop to $80-$90 per barrel and Ukrainian grain exports resume—but reconstruction costs, pegged at $500 billion by the World Bank, will test international resolve. 

Trump's bilateral approach, sidelining European allies, may strain transatlantic ties, while Russia's reintegration into trade networks could embolden other autocrats.

Putin's ICC arrest warrant, issued in March 2023 for war crimes, risks becoming a casualty of realpolitik. Past Russian demands to cancel it align with Trump's deal-making style, potentially leaving accountability in limbo. 

As analyst Keir Giles argued in his 2024 book Who Will Defend Europe? Western appeasement has historically emboldened Putin—a pattern this treaty might as well perpetuate.