European policymakers have made it unequivocally clear that any peace negotiations over the conflict in Ukraine must include both Ukraine and Europe. Excluding these key parties—by limiting discussions solely between the USA and Russia—risks undermining a durable peace and jeopardizing regional security.
EU’s Foreign Affairs Minister Kaja Kallas has been particularly vocal about rejecting negotiation tactics that bypass Ukraine and European interests. Speaking to journalists at NATO Headquarters ahead of a NATO Ukraine Council meeting, she stated:
“It is not good negotiation tactics to give things away before the negotiations have begun.”
She continued:
“Any agreement behind our backs will not work, any agreement also requires that Ukraine and Europe are part of it, and it is clear that concessions always fail.”
And she added:
“Any quick solution will not stop the killings.”
Kallas’s remarks underscore the conviction that any deal made without Ukraine’s and Europe’s full involvement is both unsustainable and unjust.
Norway and Denmark weigh in
Norwegian Defense Minister Tore O. Sandvik emphasized the necessity of including all directly affected parties. He asserted:
“It is not possible to create a peace agreement without those who are involved, those who have been attacked, and who are now fighting a freedom struggle on behalf of all of Europe being involved. It is obvious. And that also applies to Europe.”
He further stressed:
“This must be a lasting, robust, and stable peace. Of course, the parties concerned must be present.”
Denmark’s Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen also warned against sidelining Europe. He explained:
“But it is clear that Europe also has to show that we are indeed interested in this matter. The best way we can demonstrate this is by taking much better care of our own security, and historically we have not been willing to pay for that.”
He further expressed his concerns:
“What I am worried about is how to ensure that this does not become a temporary solution, where one ends up seeing conflicts flare up again within a few years if a temporary peace is achieved.”
These remarks from Scandinavian leaders highlight the urgent need for a negotiation framework that is inclusive, forward-looking, and capable of preventing future conflicts.
International developments and unilateral moves
Recent developments have only heightened these concerns. Earlier, USA’s Defense Minister Pete Hegseth indicated that Ukraine might have to relinquish parts of its territory and postpone its NATO membership as prerequisites for peace. Soon after, US President Donald Trump announced that he and Russian President Vladimir Putin had agreed to initiate peace talks immediately—even though Ukraine was not part of the conversation. Trump explained on his social media platform:
“We will begin (the negotiations, ed.) by calling President Zelensky from Ukraine to inform him about the conversation.”
Such unilateral moves have alarmed European leaders, reinforcing their longstanding position: there can be no negotiation about Ukraine without Ukraine’s direct participation.
Ukrainian voice at the center
The insistence on Ukraine’s central role in any peace process has also been echoed by other international figures. The British Defense Minister, John Haeley, stressed upon arriving at NATO’s headquarters:
“My message is that there can be no negotiations about Ukraine without Ukraine, and that Ukraine’s voice must be at the center of any conversation.”
Similarly, German Defense Minister Oscar Pistorius criticized early concessions, stating:
“It would have been better to first discuss Ukraine’s possible NATO membership at the negotiating table.”
Even NATO’s leadership has underscored that any sustainable peace requires Ukraine’s full involvement, as the conflict affects not only Ukraine but the entire European security architecture.
