Can Macron Keep America Committed to Ukraine?

Facing a fractured transatlantic alliance, European leaders have launched a diplomatic effort to salvage ties and prevent America from stepping away from Ukraine. On February 24th, French President Emmanuel Macron rushed to Washington—just three days ahead of British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s scheduled visit—hoping to persuade Donald Trump to maintain support for Kyiv. After a three-hour discussion at the White House, Macron claimed their talks had resulted in "substantive steps" forward.

The two leaders approached the issue from starkly different perspectives. Macron, like most European leaders, sees Ukraine’s security as paramount in the face of Russian aggression. "Peace," he stated while standing alongside Trump, "must not mean a surrender of Ukraine." Trump, however, has taken a drastically different stance, calling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky a "dictator" and facilitating direct talks with Russia that excluded both Ukraine and European nations. When pressed, Trump conspicuously refrained from calling Vladimir Putin a dictator, saying, "I don’t use those words lightly."

Despite these differences, Macron appeared cautiously optimistic about his visit. One key takeaway was Trump’s apparent agreement to provide some form of American "backing" for a potential European peacekeeping force in Ukraine. While the specifics remain ambiguous, Macron described it as a "turning point"—a characterization Trump did not refute.

For weeks, France and Britain have been exploring the formation of a European-led coalition to deploy peacekeeping forces in Ukraine, should a settlement acceptable to Kyiv emerge. Such a force would serve as a European security guarantee against future Russian aggression but would need American military and intelligence support to be credible. This possibility could appeal to Trump, particularly if linked to a critical-minerals deal with Ukraine that he has been pursuing.

Another surprising development was Trump’s assertion that Putin—despite his public rhetoric—might not oppose European peacekeepers in Ukraine. "He will accept that. I’ve asked him that question," Trump said before his talks with Macron. The French president emphasized that any European deployment would be limited to non-combat roles, ensuring stability rather than engaging in direct conflict. Such a force, he argued, would be essential in "reassuring" Ukraine and ensuring that "peace is respected." This would align with Europe's broader commitment to increasing its own defense spending.

Whether Macron’s efforts will yield concrete results remains uncertain. Trump’s commitments are often fluid, and his statements should be taken with caution. While he spoke with relative restraint during the joint press conference—complimenting Macron, who in turn was careful to flatter his host—the day’s events painted a more complex picture. Earlier that same day, to the dismay of European allies, the United States voted alongside Russia against a UN resolution condemning Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.

As Europe grapples with the shifting security landscape, there are signs that leaders are taking the crisis more seriously. Macron, once known for unilateral diplomatic moves, consulted 30 European and allied leaders before his Washington visit and has worked closely with Britain on security planning. "Even if American backing for a European peacekeeping force remains implicit," says Mujtaba Rahman, Managing Director for Europe at Eurasia Group, a risk consultancy, "Macron has managed to edge the conversation forward in a productive way."

The next test will come with Starmer’s visit—revealing whether this diplomatic push is more than just talk.