Key Points and Summary: As the U.S. weighs its role in a potential post-war Ukraine, the Trump administration is sending contradictory signals on the use of American troops.
-While President Trump publicly gave his “assurance” that no U.S. ground troops would act as peacekeepers, a senior administration official told Politico “there’s no red line” on the issue.
-This internal debate is intensifying amid proposals to offer Ukraine “Article 5-like” security guarantees, a NATO-style defense commitment.
-The controversial idea is already drawing fire from key Trump allies, revealing a deep divide on the future of American involvement.
U.S. Troops Headed to Ukraine: The Signals Look Mixed
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. has committed a great deal of money and weapons to Ukraine’s defense. Per the Council on Foreign Relations, as of July, the U.S. had spent a “headline figure” of $175 billion to help Ukraine.
“The historic sums have helped a broad set of Ukrainian people and institutions, including refugees, law enforcement, and independent radio broadcasters, though most of the aid has been military-related,” CFR said in its analysis.
But one thing the U.S. has not done is send American troops to Ukraine. This is one thing that differentiates U.S. involvement in Ukraine from past wars like Iraq and Afghanistan.
The question is, what would a U.S. role look like in the “peace” that follows the war, should hostilities cease?
Two very different answers have emerged this week.
“You Have My Assurance”
Appearing on Fox and Friends on Tuesday morning, Trump talked about what role U.S. troops could play in the “security guarantees” that were discussed in his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“There’ll be some form of security. It can’t be NATO,” he said, per Reuters. “They’re willing to put people on the ground. We’re willing to help them with things, especially, probably, if you could talk about by air.”
Trump was then asked if he could provide any promise that U.S. troops wouldn’t end up on the ground, Trump answered, “You have my assurance. You know, I’m president.”
It’s part of Trump’s established foreign policy doctrine of not being shy about getting involved in foreign conflicts, while seeking to avoid open-ended commitments, especially involving ground troops.
However, one administration official seemed to indicate otherwise.
“I Don’t Think There’s a Red Line”
Politico’s Playbook, in a newsletter published on Tuesday, looked at the aftermath of the Trump-Putin meeting and what “security guarantees” might look like. The newsletter was published the same morning as Trump’s Fox interview, but before he went on the air.
“We haven’t even started [that discussion] other than a commitment,” one senior administration official told Politico.
“The question is, ‘Who participates to what percentage?’ But the president did commit that we would be a part of it. No specifics. And then he said he would also help it get organized. And he alone could sell that to Putin. I don’t think Putin would pay any attention to the others, and I’m not sure the others would do it without him.”
That official also seemed to contradict what Trump said on Fox about promising no troops on the ground.
“I don’t think there’s a red line,” the first senior official told Playbook. “So I think it just kind of remains to be seen. [President Trump] would like the Europeans to step up. But I think if the last piece of the puzzle was for a period of time to be a part of a peacekeeping force, I think he would do it.”
An Article 5 Commitment?
After the Putin meeting, Trump envoy Steve Witkoff said that Ukraine could receive “Article 5-like protections” as part of a peace deal, and that the U.S. could participate in such protections. That’s a reference to the provision in the North Atlantic Treaty that “an attack against one Ally is considered as an attack against all Allies.” Ukraine is not a member of NATO, but such a provision being included in a peace deal would protect it against future invasion, under the implied penalty that NATO — the U.S. included — would defend them against such an attack.
That news wasn’t well-received in some segments of the MAGA coalition.
“I’m just lost how the United States offering an Article 5 commitment for a security guarantee to Ukraine is a win for the United States,” former Trump adviser Steve Bannon said on his show this week, per Politico.
About the Author: Stephen Silver
Stephen Silver is an award-winning journalist, essayist, and film critic, and contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Broad Street Review, and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. For over a decade, Stephen has authored thousands of articles that focus on politics, national security, technology, and the economy. Follow him on X (formerly Twitter) at @StephenSilver, and subscribe to his Substack newsletter.
Fighter Jet Fails
Russia’s Su-57 Felon Stealth Fighter Is a Waste of Rubles
