Political Scientist Assesses Berlin Ukraine Summit as Progress

A recent summit in Berlin has brought a unified stance on Ukraine’s security but stopped short of legally binding defence pledges. Political scientist Claudia Major called the results a step forward, though she warned against expecting a quick end to the war. The meeting saw coordination between Ukraine, Europe, and the US, but key differences remain over how to achieve lasting peace.

The Berlin summit produced security guarantees for Ukraine, though these fall short of NATO-style mutual defence commitments. Claudia Major stressed that the pledges are not legally enforceable, unlike NATO’s Article 5, contradicting Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s earlier comparison. She also noted that Russia shows no real interest in ending the conflict, focusing instead on military victory.

Various governments have pushed for ceasefires or peace talks, each with different approaches. Ukraine’s leadership, including President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has repeatedly sought temporary truces, sometimes accepting conditional proposals. Russia, meanwhile, has offered limited pauses—such as a 30-day halt in 2025—but tied them to demands like territorial concessions or demilitarisation. The US, Germany, and other European states have engaged in discussions, while third parties like Saudi Arabia and Turkey have hosted mediation efforts.

Despite these talks, Major cautioned that Russia’s refusal to engage meaningfully makes a swift resolution unlikely. The summit’s outcome reflects a shared Western position but leaves critical questions about enforcement and long-term stability unanswered.

The Berlin summit has aligned Ukraine, Europe, and the US on security support, though without binding obligations. Russia’s continued rejection of ceasefire terms suggests the war will persist for the foreseeable future. The guarantees agreed upon now depend on political will rather than legal enforcement.