BERLIN — Western and Ukrainian negotiators said Wednesday that a U.S.-brokered framework for ending Russia’s war is nearing a make-or-break stage, with Germany and other allies pushing security guarantees meant to deter any renewed assault. Conservative lawmaker Jürgen Hardt urged President Vladimir Putin to “take what’s on the table,” but the Kremlin signaled it remains opposed to any European troop deployment as part of a deal, Dec. 17, 2025.
The outlines of the proposal hardened after two days of meetings involving Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, European leaders and U.S. negotiators, who said most outstanding points are close to settled while the hardest decisions — territory and enforcement — remain unresolved, according to a Reuters report on the Berlin talks.
Ukraine peace talks: Security guarantees move from idea to enforcement plan
European leaders framed the negotiations as shifting from broad promises to specific mechanisms — including military options — aimed at preventing Moscow from attacking again after any ceasefire. A joint statement adopted by top European leaders and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen described “robust security guarantees” that would include sustained support for Ukraine’s forces, a European-led multinational force supported by the U.S., and a U.S.-led ceasefire monitoring and verification system, according to the European Council’s statement.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, speaking after the talks, underscored that any “guarantee” would need teeth. “We would secure a demilitarized zone… and… act against corresponding Russian incursions and attacks,” Merz said, adding, “We’re not there yet,” according to a Reuters account of Merz’s interview with ZDF.
The European statement also argued that decisions about territory must ultimately be made by Ukrainians, and stressed the line that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.” It said “international borders must not be changed by force,” while pressing Russia to show it is willing to support a ceasefire and negotiate “in earnest.”
Hardt urges Putin to accept the offer as alliance cohesion hardens
Hardt, the foreign policy spokesman for Germany’s conservative CDU/CSU bloc, said the Kremlin faces a choice: accept the terms taking shape among the U.S., Ukraine and European capitals or risk deeper Western backing for Kyiv. He spoke as the talks fed expectations that Washington is weighing an “Article 5-like” security model — stronger than past pledges but short of NATO membership — as a possible bridge between Kyiv’s needs and Moscow’s demands. Hardt’s comments were made in an interview with DW, which also reported him citing Trump envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner as committed to the plan.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said the U.S. message sounded more like an allied posture than a distant partnership, telling reporters he heard American negotiators describe a military response if Russia attacks again, while Sweden’s Ulf Kristersson said the guarantees have become “clearer and more credible,” though he warned “many difficult questions remain.”
Kremlin defiant on foreign troops as talks move toward Moscow
Russia’s response remained pointedly skeptical, even as it left the door open to discussion. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia’s opposition to foreign military contingents in Ukraine has not changed: “Our position on foreign military contingents on the territory of Ukraine is well known,” he told reporters, calling it “a subject for discussion,” according to a Reuters report from Moscow.
Peskov also said Witkoff was not expected to visit Moscow this week and that Russia expects the U.S. to brief it on the Berlin discussions. The Kremlin has repeatedly said Ukraine’s NATO aspirations are a core issue, and Russia has yet to agree to the ceasefire that U.S. and European leaders have described as a prerequisite for any postwar security architecture.
Territory remains the hardest gap — and the most politically explosive
Even as negotiators touted progress, territorial questions remained the sharpest fault line. U.S. officials told reporters they had agreement on about 90% of issues but acknowledged that longstanding disputes over territory persist. Reuters also reported that Washington is pressing Kyiv on potential withdrawals in eastern Ukraine — proposals that could trigger fierce domestic blowback. Zelenskyy has described territorial concessions as “painful,” and reiterated that Ukraine will not recognize Donbas as Russian “de jure or de facto,” the report said.
Zelenskyy has also signaled he would push Washington to tighten sanctions and provide additional weapons if Moscow rejects the package under discussion. Kyiv has supported the idea of a limited ceasefire around the Christmas period for energy strikes, while warning that any pause without credible enforcement could simply allow Russia to regroup.
From Minsk to Bürgenstock: earlier road maps that still shape today’s push
The current debate over guarantees and enforcement reflects lessons drawn from past diplomatic efforts that struggled to stop the fighting or to compel compliance.
In February 2015, European leaders helped broker the Minsk framework, and Germany published a Minsk declaration endorsing the “Package of Measures” as a pathway toward a ceasefire and political settlement — language that later proved vulnerable to competing interpretations and weak enforcement.
Analysts have long argued that the Minsk documents contained contradictions that made implementation fragile. A Chatham House research paper on the Minsk-2 agreement described how the framework tried to paper over deeply different views of Ukraine’s sovereignty, leaving core disputes unresolved.
After Russia’s full-scale invasion, international efforts broadened. At the Bürgenstock summit in Switzerland, participants said they gathered June 15-16, 2024, to advance a peace framework based on international law, according to the joint communiqué published by Switzerland’s foreign ministry. The communiqué’s emphasis on sovereignty and territorial integrity echoes the themes now reemerging in Berlin — but with far sharper focus on how any agreement would be verified and defended.
For now, officials say technical work is expected to continue in coming days, with working groups preparing next steps as the U.S. weighs whether, and how, to take the emerging package to Moscow. The gap between headline progress and hard commitments — especially on troop presence, territory and enforcement — will determine whether this moment becomes a turning point or another stalled chapter.
