Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on Wednesday dismissed the idea of NATO membership for Ukraine as part of a peace deal with Russia and said the goal to restore Ukraine to its pre-2014 borders was “unrealistic.”
Hegseth made the comments while addressing a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Brussels. “The United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome for a negotiated settlement,” he said.
Hegseth said the Trump administration’s goal is to end the war through diplomacy, which he said must start “by recognizing that returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective. Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more suffering.”
Restoring Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders has been a war goal of Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky, although there have been signs in recent months that he’s accepted that’s unrealistic. But he is still calling for strong security guarantees from the US that involve the deployment of troops, which Hegseth also dismissed.
“Any security guarantee must be backed by capable European and non-European troops. If these troops are deployed as peacekeepers to Ukraine at any point, they should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission, and they should not be covered under Article 5,” he said.
“There also must be robust international oversight of the line of contact. To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be US troops deployed to Ukraine,” Hegseth added.
On Monday, Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, said Moscow would consider any foreign troops deployed to Ukraine that are not under the authority of the UN Security Council legitimate targets of the Russian military.
“Peacekeepers’ cannot operate without a mandate from the UN Security Council. Otherwise, any foreign military contingents sent into the combat zone will be regarded as ordinary combatants under international law and a legitimate military target for our armed forces,” Nebenzia said, according to RT.
Hegseth said that the US wanted to reduce involvement in Ukraine to focus on the border and a military buildup in the Asia Pacific aimed at China and claimed Beijing was a threat to the US homeland.
“The United States faces consequential threats to our homeland. We must, and we are focusing on the security of our own borders. We also face a peer competitor in the Communist Chinese with the capability and intent to threaten our homeland,” he said.
Hegseth also said that going forward, European countries should provide the majority of funding to Ukraine and pushed President Trump’s call for NATO countries to increase military spending to 5% of their Gross Domestic Product.
“We ask each of your countries to step up on fulfilling the commitments that you have made, and we challenge your countries and your citizens to double down and recommit yourselves, not only to Ukraine’s immediate security needs but to Europe’s long-term defense and deterrence goals,” Hegseth said.
The secretary said that the Trump administration was “committed” to the US “defense partnership” with Europe but stressed the US expects the European countries to pay more.
As predicted by many, this is the beginning of trump abandoning Ukraine to keep his buddy Putin happy.
Here we go again, Trump is Putin's bitch and blah blah blah.
Trump is Putin's bitch That is the way trump acts.
… coming from the "Tim Burns" whose head is so far up the Apartheid State of Israel's a$$ that we can't tell when it's you talking or the ASI farting.
You comment is something I would expect from a third grader. You can do better, but you would have to work at it.
You expect me to be at the level of your classmates ? No.
Also, my statement was technically and legally accurate.
Ukraine is accepting volunteers to fight the Russians. When are you leaving?
"When are you leaving?" is what I ask Timbit out loud every time I see a new dumbs**t comment from him.
They all promised to leave if Trump was elected President. But that was all BS like everything else they spout.
At the inauguration of any president – Bush II, Obama, Trump, Biden – the wealthy Right and Hollywood Left always threaten to suddenly display conscience.
Then they look at their income and decide not to leave.
No, I meant “when is Major Burns going to figure out he’s a contrarian f**kwit and pi$$ off to StormFront or Conservapedia or Reddit where he & other abhorrent dipwads sharing his vacuous ethos can huff each others’ political farts without “facts” constantly interfering ???”
I never hear the political Right, wealthy or not, threatening to leave the US if their party loses. It’s always the leftist freaks that say they will but never do.
I'll agree about the wealthy but I've heard normal folk from both sides say it plenty of times. Never seen them leave either.
Oh yeah – the Right wails about Obama Death Panels and FEMA Concentration Camps and Socialist Joe and American Communism and Christian persecution until their accountants point out that no other Predominantly White English-Speaking Western Country is as good for their bank accounts as the USA.
Both the Left and Right pout in the same fashion when the Right or the Left capture power.
And Russians will accept your help also. When are you leaving?
I already voted to make Trump our new President. Why would I leave my country? That’s a silly suggestion.
This is welcomed news. And no one is abandoning Ukraine. That would imply someone actually had their back at some point. The "backing" they did receive was never enough for them to actually defeat Russia. They've been used as fodder from the start. I would think many Ukrainians also welcome this news.
We will see. Time will tell.
What, no bold 100% guaranteed predictions from you any more ?
Keep reading my comments, I'm sure I will have some in the future. Thanks for following me.
I’m not following you, I’m following the digital footprints covered in bulls**t that keep leading to your Comments.
"I would think many Ukrainians also welcome this news."
That's what recent polls point to.
Though guessing you could find other measures of sentiment – draft evasion rates, strength of Ukrainian conscription-evasion networks…and dissenting speech in form of anti-Zelensky sentiment, demands for elections, anonymous chatrooms… Russian spoken in private vs public spaces. Toilet stall graffiti.
"Poll: Majority of Ukrainians Want Peace Talks to End War with Russia"
"survey marked the first time since the Russian invasion that a Gallup poll found…majority of Ukrainians favored negotiations to end the war. (antiwar)
"this is the beginning of trump abandoning Ukraine"
oh no! then possibly a settlement?
so ukraine might not have to start drafting its 18-yr-olds, like blinken demanded?
how very sad for you.
"Blinken Says Ukraine Must Send Younger People Into War
The US is pressuring Ukraine to lower the minimum conscription age from 25 to 18" (antiwar)
Those Americans in the US congress who encouraged Ukraine to instigate a War with Russia should be deeply ashamed of themselves. They talked tough over in Kiev, but in the end they only gave Putin the excuse he needed to annex Eastern Ukraine.
Putin never wanted to annex Easter Ukraine. The Minsk agreement called for Ukraine to respect the Russian language and culture of Eastern Ukraine and give them some autonomy. That's all Putin asked for. But as we now know for a fact, the Minsk agreement was negotiated in bad faith by Ukraine, Germany, and France.
"Putin never wanted to annex Easter Ukraine" Nonsense.
The 2022 peace proposal had Ukraine remaining whole other than Crimea. So no, he didn't.
Blaming Putin's naked aggression on the US Congress is just silly.
Ignoring the US' provocations of the previous 30 years is what is really silly.
Provocation definition: action or speech that makes someone annoyed or angry. So being angry with someone is justification for attacking and killing them?
And you apply that to this situation? Having an openly hostile military alliance on your border is the same as someone pissing you off in traffic?
"Provocation definition: action or speech that makes someone annoyed or angry. So b-"
wake up, dolt – obviously relevant definition here:
"action or speech held to be likely to prompt physical retaliation"
Hegseth said that the US wanted to reduce involvement in Ukraine to focus on the border and a military buildup in the Asia Pacific aimed at China and claimed Beijing was a threat to the US homeland.
“The United States faces consequential threats to our homeland. We must, and we are focusing on the security of our own borders. We also face a peer competitor in the Communist Chinese with the capability and intent to threaten our homeland,” he said.
I felt really good until I got to this part.
Well, what did you think, that the America Empire had suddenly seen the light and would sing Kumbaya with the rest of the world?
It seems that no American Administration can ever endorse peace across the board. Somehow, the MIC must be appeased with a new war somewhere else, whenever an old war is finally recognized as lost.
Well … I mean, hundreds of billions of easy profits are at stake, so, yes!
The message to Europe today is very clear. The NATO members are going to have to start to pony up more money for their own defense and also to help what's left of Ukraine. Trump is sending notice that the days of the US guaranteeing Europe's security is over.
Their own defense against whom? Russia is not gonna invade Europe. And even if Putin did want to do such a thing, he does not have the necessary economic and military resources – any number of European states (Germany, France, UK) have individual military budgets at least equal to that of Russia. Add them all together and they are vastly superior to Russia both economically and militarily. Plus, UK and France have nukes too.
This is all hogwash, propaganda by the military-industrial complex to increase profit. Also, an attempt by the elites (both American and European) to keep their populations fixated on some imaginary enemy rather than the failure of neoliberal capitalism and globalization.
"Russia is not gonna invade Europe." Not all of Europe. But individual countries, that is a different story. See Ukraine for proof.
Other than Ukraine and Belarus, all other countries surrounding Russia are NATO members. Invading a single inch of any of those countries would immediately trigger Article 5 and lead to a full Russia-NATO war which Russia has no hope of winning. So, no, it's not gonna happen, Russians are not suicidal. Not that logic and facts seem to matter much to you.
all other countries surrounding Russia are NATO members
Which is the main reason Russia eventually invaded Ukraine.
Yes, Ukraine was the straw that broke the camel's back.
What a wonderful reason to invade a country.
I didn't say it was wonderful. They did what our country would have done minus the shock and awe. And I'm not saying that makes it right. I'm not on team Russia.
He does not care about logic, reason, or facts. It's assertions and baseless claims "all the way down" with him.
"the days of the US guaranteeing Europe's security is over." In others words the USA would not abide by Article 5. That is the fact of that statement. And simple logic tells one that without the support of the USA, it is unlikely that other countries would honor Article 5. Too deep of thought process for you to handle? You are not alone, trump does not understand it either.
Of course the US would abide by Article 5, since all Article 5 requires is that, if a NATO member state is attacked, other member states do whatever they happen to feel like doing.
Wait a moment … Are the reasons for the military operation of the russian armed forces against the ukrainian armed forces present in Russia's relations to other countries too?
Not proof.
The Russian Federation does not have R2P casus belli in the Baltic states, Poland, Finland.
It definitively had R2P justification with Ukraine.
You are trying (failing) to retcon events with a known cause, to fit your preferred narrative.
Putin did not invade Ukraine because he cared about the Russian's living there. Hitler used that same justification for invading Czechoslovakia and Poland. Can you see the parallels? Probably not.
Leave it to you to invoke Godwin’s Law.
Putin’s publicly stated goals for invading Ukraine :
1. Responsibility 2 Protect ethnic Russians in the Donbas facing harsh racial discrimination.
2. Prevent Ukraine from joining NATO & hosting offensive (not defensive) NATO assets.
3. De-Nazify Ukraine.
As to 3 – you knew that Putin’s older brother died in Stalingrad when the Nazis seiged the city ? Probably not.
See NATO expansion and 30 years of provocations.
"'Russia is not gonna invade'…all of Europe. But individual countries, that is a different story. See Ukraine for proof."
Plain ignorant – as many ex-Cold Warriors predicted clearly, post-Soviet Russia would see expanding NATO – above all into Ukraine – as security threat & provocation:
In 2008, outgoing war criminal Bush wanted Ukraine and Georgia on a NATO membership path. "Before the [NATO] meeting, William Burns…C.I.A. director who was then ambassador to Russia, cautioned that such a move would have deadly consequences:
“'Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all red lines for the Russian elite (not just Putin)'…Burns advised from Moscow. He specifically predicted that attempting to bring Ukraine into NATO would 'create fertile soil for Russian meddling in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.' Senior intelligence officials like Fiona Hill delivered similar warnings." ("The Tale the West Tells Itself About Ukraine," NYT)
"Trump is sending notice that the days of the US guaranteeing Europe's security is over." If that is true, than Europe is going to need a lot more nations building nuclear weapons than just France and UK. Poland, Germany, Spain, Turkey and Italy need to joint the nuclear club.
Right. If the US doesn't guarantee Europe's security, Europe will be nuked into oblivion. /s
Indeed – somehow MORE nuclear-armed nations are a good plan in Timbit's limited scope ?
UNLESS those nations are Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Yemen, Iran. THEY can't "nuke up" for self-defense against an ACTUAL nuclear-armed genocidal rogue-state neighbour / rival….
Yes, Spain and Italy – two European countries who, by geography, have shared tense borders with the Soviet Union for thousands of years.
Do you actually READ the dumb s**t you write, or just slam "Comment" the instant you feel your brain shat out your latest genius insight ????
Do you understand the value of NATO or do you just go along with what trump says? Trump has some dumb ideas like making Canada the 51st state. Just what the US needs another welfare state to take care of.
NATO had value. Then, when I was in the 9th Grade (1990-1991) the reason for NATO ended with the peaceful collapse of the USSR. I know Neocons hate that the Soviet Union lost the Cold War and that America didn’t defiantly win it, but that’s their butthurt.
Since the early 1990s, it is entirely true that NATO exists only to counter the threat posed by NATO’s own continued existence.
NATO seems to exist as a MIC welfare program, a Mafioso “protection racket”, and a dream of Neocons to finally defeat the Soviets in the mid-late 2020’s.
Canadians have no interest in joining the USA. America has a Metric f**k-ton of social, political, and economic problems and WE don’t want to have a clinically retarded bully in our house to dote upon as a Social Worker writ Special Ed assistant.
Really, Canada should be forming a committee to look at how best to accept and settle American refugees in the next couple years.
Yeah, the US is going to be Canada's Mexico. 😉
"If…true, than Europe is going to need a lot more nations building nuclear weapons…Poland, Germany, Spain, Turkey and Italy need to joint the nuclear club."
maybe, for now, stick to yr dream of the planned murder of the palestinian people? leave the human race for later?
I think the real message is more like the USA is giving up on the Ukraine. That is the only thing actually under the control of the USA. Europe can do whatever it likes, in terms of keeping up the fight, or not. Especially given that the USA is cutting and running. And with regard to that choice, and the choice to pony up more money for their own defense, I seriously doubt they will do either. Why not just cut a deal with Putin, like Trump is doing? And then cut defense spending? Why should the Euros keep fighting if the Big Bad "Leader," the USA is obviously heading for the exits? Wasn't the USA, along with the UK, the lead instigator in the first place? Of both the mirage of Ukrainian NATO membership and the direct course from Maiden through the events of 2021-2? Europe also just doesn't have the hardware, or the money, to continue it's current bankrolling and arming of the Ukraine AND picking up the share that the USA has been carrying in that regard until now. And the Ukraine is quite a lot for Putin to digest, assuming he even wants all of it. At the least, it will keep Russia occupied for quite a while. I find all the talk about how the Euros "fear" Russia to be mainly BS, except perhaps with respect to Poland and the Baltic States. Germany is under no threat. Nor is France, Italy or the Low Countris. Never mind Great Britain or the Iberian countries. And even some of the other nearer NATO members, like Slovakia and Hungary, already seem more interested in cutting a deal with Russia than arming to the teeth to confront it.
Bear in mind that the "cut" in "cut and run" can be read as "cut your losses". Trump 1 & Biden were deep in the Sunk Cost Fallacy.
The spoiled irrelevant little children (Europe and zelensky) will stomp their feet and whine, but in this case finally the US is making its own choices in its own interests. The US can veto new NATO members and decides on its own deployments.
I have to say I am very surprised by this. I've always looked at the war in Ukraine as America's effort to weaken Russia, effect a regime change in Russia, and then dismember Russia.
It would have allowed the American Empire to a) gain control of chunks of Russia and their natural resources while at the same time denying those natural resources to China, and b) completely encircle China.
So, if China is America's mortal enemy (it is not!), fighting the war in Ukraine made sense and was even cost-effective.
Now a screeching u-turn. Is the plan now to peacefully co-opt Russia and turn them against China? I don't see that plan working.
At this stage Russia and China Collaboration is Irreversible no matter what US does now or in the future…!
"Russia and China Collaboration is Irreversible" History tells you that is not true. They get closer and then they spread apart.
There may be some preaching that; but, anyway Hegseth's speech is preposterously beside the point. Russia will deal with Ukraine by itself. It was never a Russia-Ukraine war, but Washington-Russia war. And Russia is demanding a big picture "security architecture" price in return for all the blood and treasure Washington has caused them to pay. And trump is NOT the POTUS. And so we'll see if the NeoConNazi Deep State is ready to give up its religion. ??
Trump is about enriching his own bottom line. The MIC already has its investors and beneficiaries and The Donald didn't buy in early enough to profit.
Trump can't profit off the Ukraine War nearly as great as he can profit off a ground-floor position to buy into Ukrainian "rare-earth reserves" (which Trump probably figures are gold, platinum, mithril, adamantium, vibranium, unobtanium, and dilithium crystals) with the war ended.
Rand Paul
@RandPaul
Tulsi is fearless, principled, and has an unwavering commitment to our country and to our constitution.
Congratulation on your confirmation,
@tulsigabbard!
11:47 AM · Feb 12, 2025
·
282.5K
Views
IF true, it's a major (and welcome!) turning point in US/Russia relations. The USA, since the 1970s, has done everything in its power to prevent the development of close relations between western Europe and the Soviet Union/Russia; withdrawal of the USA from the leadership role will simply hasten the redevelopment of such relationships, for everyone except our little servile toadies in the UK, and that's a good thing. Good for US taxpayers, Good for the European and Russian economies.
BAD for the military-industrial complex and the neocons, but there is no hell hot enough to burn those miscreants in anyway.
"We also face a peer competitor in the Communist Chinese…"
And that riiiiight there is the core principles of the Trump administration and Project 2025. A little "Red Scare" of Communism with some postmodern "Yellow Peril" fear of Chinese ascendancy. Mix 'em together and you have what the Orange Man's gov't is all about.
Tell me something I didn’t already know.