Ukraine’s Security Architecture After Ceasefire: U.S. Commitments and the Future of European Defense

Downloads

Download the Article:

Authors

  • Mohammed Kabeer Garba PhD Scholar, ECOWAS Parliament, Abuja, Nigeria
https://doi.org/10.55559/sjahss.v4i9.577

Keywords:

Ukraine, security architecture, U.S. commitments, European defense, NATO, ceasefire

Abstract

This study analyzes the security architecture of Ukraine, which evolved after the termination of hostilities and specifically, how the U.S. engagements with Ukraine affect their security. The first aims to examine the changing nature of Ukrainian security environment in the post ceasefire era, to examine the role played by the United States in the Ukrainian defence posture and to examine the consequences thereof to the structure of European defence systems, particularly NATO. The discussion is based on two theoretical approaches: Neorealism, which predicts the relationship of power and the desire of the states to find safety, and Complex Interdependence Theory, which emphasizes the cooperation of multilateralism and non-war aspects of security. The results show that there is a major change in the security architecture in Ukraine due to both the internal and external assistance, with most of this support coming through the United States and European supporters. The United States has a key role in modernizing the defence and aligning Ukraine strategic direction with NATO as the European defence approaches are shifting to greater independence and capability. Despite these developments, the paper identifies the ongoing threats due to Russian aggression, internal governance challenges and the need to have strong international collaboration to maintain stability. In summary, despite the fact that the security perspective of Ukraine has been enhanced by the process of reform and foreign support, the further stability on the long-term basis requires reduction of the internal vulnerabilities and the external threats. The European defence path will then be predominantly hinged on the balances between the NATO commitments and the strategic autonomy and technological innovations.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Applebaum, A. (2017). Red famine: Stalin's war on Ukraine. Doubleday.

Biscop, S. (2022). European defense: The global perspective. Palgrave Macmillan.

Brands, H., & Gallo, M. (2022). The United States and the world: The legacy of U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century. Rowman & Littlefield.

Charap, S., & Colton, T. (2017). Everyone loses: The Ukraine crisis and the risks to global security. Brookings Institution Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429031571

Congressional Research Service. (2023). U.S. security assistance to Ukraine: Background and policy issues. CRS Report R45504.

Eke, A. (2021). The role of NATO in Ukraine's defense modernization. International Relations Journal, 34(2), 44-67.

European Commission. (2023). NATO-EU cooperation: Key achievements and challenges. https://ec.europa.eu/energy

Fiott, D. (2022). The strategic compass: European defense and the path toward autonomy. Springer.

Fiott, D. (2023). Emerging defense technologies and Europe's strategic future. European Defense Review, 1(1), 13-29.

Friedman, M. (2023). U.S. strategic partnerships: Lessons from Israel and South Korea. Global Security Insights, 25(4), 89-110.

Galeotti, M. (2023). Russia’s geopolitical strategy after the war in Ukraine. Cambridge University Press.

Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and interdependence: World politics in transition. Little, Brown and Company.

Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2001). Power and interdependence (3rd ed.). Longman.

Klein, S. (2022). The modernization of Ukraine's military: Challenges and solutions. Defense Studies Journal, 28(1), 52-71.

Katchanovski, I. (2017). Ukraine's internal security and governance challenges. National Security Review, 10(2), 45-58.

Kroenig, M., & Ashford, C. (2023). The U.S. and NATO's role in Ukraine's future security. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 31(2), 58-72.

Major, C., & Mölling, C. (2022). Germany's defense policy and NATO: A new era. Springer.

Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014). Why the Ukraine crisis is the West's fault: The liberal delusions that provoked Putin. Foreign Affairs, 93(5), 77-89.

Pifer, S. (2017). The U.S., NATO, and the future of Ukraine. Brookings Institution Press.

Polyakov, V. (2023). Post-war reconstruction of Ukraine’s military forces. Eurasian Defense Review, 22(3), 102-118.

Sherr, L., & Litra, M. (2023). The challenge of capacity-building in Ukraine's defense sector. Ukrainian Security Journal, 19(1), 67-85.

Shevchenko, O. (2018). Ukraine's defense reforms and NATO integration. Journal of Eastern European Security, 13(4), 90-112.

Stoltenberg, J. (2023). NATO and the future of collective defense. NATO Review, 11(3), 24-38.

Transparency International. (2023). Corruption in Ukraine's defense sector: An analysis. https://transparency.org

von Closen, R., & Dembinski, M. (2021). Minsk agreements and their failure: Lessons from Ukraine's peace process. International Security Studies, 8(2), 75-92.

Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of international politics. Addison-Wesley.

Published on: 29-11-2025

Also Available On

Note: Third-party indexing sometime takes time. Please wait one week or two for indexing. Validate this article's Schema Markup on Schema.org

How to Cite

Garba, M. K. (2025). Ukraine’s Security Architecture After Ceasefire: U.S. Commitments and the Future of European Defense. Sprin Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(9), 57–62. https://doi.org/10.55559/sjahss.v4i9.577

Issue

Section

Research Article
2583-2387

Most read articles by the same author(s)