BRUSSELS — On Wednesday, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth expressed doubts about Ukraine’s prospects for NATO membership, suggesting that the country might need to rethink its aspirations to regain its borders as they existed prior to 2014. Instead of hoping for an unrealistic return to those borders, he indicated that Ukraine should consider a negotiated resolution to the conflict with Russia, which could involve an international peacekeeping force. The remarks were made during Hegseth’s inaugural visit to NATO under the new administration of President Donald Trump, as allies were eager to learn about Washington’s plans regarding military and financial support for Ukraine.
Hegseth conveyed that there is a strong push for European nations to shoulder the majority of the financial and military responsibilities concerning Ukraine’s defense, potentially involving a peacekeeping mission that excludes U.S. forces. Significantly, he stated that this force should not be protected under NATO’s Article Five, which mandates mutual defense among member states, thereby potentially leaving U.S. troops out of any direct conflict with Russian forces. “There will not be U.S. troops deployed to Ukraine,” he asserted.
During the assembly of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, Hegseth urged that members reconsider what he referred to as the “illusionary goal” of restoring Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders. This sentiment came amidst ongoing support for Ukraine from approximately 50 nations that have rallied together since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. Hegseth stated that it is crucial for the group to rise to the occasion and meet the challenges presented by the current situation.
In response to Hegseth’s comments, U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey echoed these sentiments, emphasizing the importance of unity and support for Ukraine. The press was present as this dialogue unfolded at the start of a closed-door meeting in Brussels aimed at discussing future assistance to Ukraine. Over the past three years, 50 nations have collectively provided Ukraine with over $126 billion in military aid, with the U.S. contributing more than $66.5 billion as the group’s chair. However, this week’s meeting was convened by the United Kingdom, and discussions regarding the chair for the next meeting have yet to be settled.
No announcements regarding new armaments for Ukraine were expected during Hegseth’s visit, which was timed just before the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion set for February 24, 2022. Concerns linger among U.S. allies that a victorious Putin may not stop his ambitions at Ukraine’s borders, raising alarms about the implications of Europe’s most significant land conflict in decades.
President Trump has expressed intentions to bring the war to a swift conclusion, lamenting the strain on American taxpayers. He proposed that Ukraine should leverage its rare earth minerals and energy resources to finance U.S. support. Hegseth went on to stress the need for all NATO nations to amplify their defense expenditures to reach 5% of their budgets, a target that even the U.S. currently does not fulfill. He declared, “The United States will no longer tolerate an imbalanced relationship which encourages dependence.”
Some allies are concerned that pushing for a rapid resolution could lead to unfavorable outcomes for Ukraine. Before Hegseth’s address, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte articulated that any peace deal with Putin would require sustained military support for Ukraine from its allies to maintain pressure on Russia. He emphasized the need for a united front to ensure decisive economic repercussions for Russia, stating that failure to do so may undermine Ukraine’s position.
NATO is built on the premise that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all, thereby resulting in a collective response. Securing membership is viewed as a critical security assurance, which Ukraine has sought for an extended period. In the wake of the conflict, European allies have significantly increased their military budgets, with 23 of them reaching or exceeding the strategic goal of spending 2% of their GDP. Yet, a third of NATO members have not achieved this benchmark, and Trump is likely to address this gap again.
Notably, no NATO countries have yet increased their defense spending to the 5% benchmark, even as Poland inches closer at over 4%. Commenting from Germany, Hegseth refrained from committing to a U.S. increase to 5% of GDP but suggested that defense spending should be above levels set during the Biden administration, ideally not dropping below 3%. He underscored that any decisions would ultimately rest with Trump and highlighted the necessity of being prudent with taxpayer funds. Presently, the U.S. allocates about 3.3% of its GDP for defense.
NATO leaders are slated to discuss new spending goals during their upcoming summit in The Hague, Netherlands, scheduled for June 24 to 26.
