Commentary

Any peace settlement that prioritises appeasing Russia over upholding Ukraine’s territorial integrity would not only betray Kyiv but also expose the European Union to grave strategic consequences. If annexation of Crimea or Russian control over parts of Donbas is legitimised in some way, the EU will face a dangerous precedent: borders in Europe can be again changed by force.

Such an outcome would signal to Russia and other authoritarian actors that military aggression pays off. More broadly, it would call into question the international norms underpinning the European project: sovereignty, inviolability of borders, peaceful conflict resolution and rule of law. The EU, which has long positioned itself as a normative power and defender of the rules-based international order, cannot afford to allow such a peace to take shape without its firm and active involvement.

Moreover, a ceasefire that leaves Ukraine in a precarious or “neutral” position—with ambiguous security guarantees or no clear pathway to NATO and EU integration—would be profoundly destabilising. It would effectively leave Ukraine as a permanent buffer zone between Russia and the West, subject to recurring cycles of coercion and violence.

For the EU, this is not just a geopolitical nuisance—it’s a direct security threat. A vulnerable Ukraine on Europe’s eastern flank invites hybrid threats, refugee surges, economic disruption, and the expansion of Russian influence into EU member states and aspirant countries. Without a strong, sovereign Ukraine aligned with the West, the EU’s eastern frontier becomes a zone of chronic instability.

After the end of the Cold War, and especially in the last two decades, the EU has made significant political and financial investments in neighbouring countries of Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and Armenia—nations that seek EU membership and align with its values. A peace that compromises Ukraine’s sovereignty would weaken the credibility of the EU’s enlargement policy, signalling that even the most committed reformers may be left in a grey zone if security threats arise.

This would not only stall democratic transformations in the region but also embolden anti-European forces. In Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and parts of the Western Balkans, Russian-aligned/sponsored actors would use such a precedent to argue that the EU cannot be relied upon when it matters most.

For Brussels, this is an inflexion point: either it solidifies its role as a geopolitical actor with real strategic influence or risks irrelevance in its own neighbourhood.

Global Consequences and the Credibility of Sanctions

A peace agreement that rewards Russian aggression—by lifting sanctions or failing to demand accountability for war crimes and territorial violations—would undermine years of EU foreign policy. Sanctions, one of the EU’s primary instruments of leverage, would lose their deterrent value. Other regimes would take note, seeing that the EU’s tools may be strong in rhetoric but weak in outcome.

Even worse, the EU’s moral authority, which is so critical to its soft power projection, would be undermined. In a world increasingly defined by the contest between democracy and authoritarianism, the EU must demonstrate its willingness to defend its principles, even when doing so requires political risk and strategic patience.

Europe Must Lead, Not Follow

The EU cannot afford to be a bystander at this critical juncture. It must ensure that any peace process ends violence and secures a durable, just, and rules-based outcome that protects Ukraine’s sovereignty and reinforces European security.

This requires:

• The peace agreement that will be reached does not compromise Ukraine’s sovereignty;
• Continued military, economic, and institutional support for Ukraine;
• Affirmation of the enlargement process and EU integration path for Ukraine and other aspirant states;
• Making clear that sanctions will remain until Russia complies with international norms and is held accountable.

To achieve all these, the EU must closely coordinate with its transatlantic partners, especially Washington, to ensure that Europe’s future is shaped not by Moscow’s aggression but by a unified commitment to peace, justice, and democratic values. Decisions about the continent’s security and post-war order should be made collectively, rooted in shared principles of international law and a common vision for lasting stability.