Donald Trump has canceled a planned summit with Vladimir Putin in Budapest, in a move that signals a shift towards a more cautious attitude towards Moscow after the Alaska meeting fiasco. Despite Trump’s diplomatic efforts, the Russian president insists on maximalist demands, asking for control of Crimea and additional Ukrainian territory in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.

Putin is seeking recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea and four Ukrainian regions that act as a bridge to Russia, either in whole or in part, James Stavridis reports in a Bloomberg article. If Moscow’s demands were met, the rest of the Ukrainian state would be left virtually defenseless against a future Russian attack, while Russia would be freed from international sanctions that are slowing, if not hurting, its war economy. These are maximalist demands, which Russia, as the aggressor, is not entitled to.

Sooner or later, Putin will probably be forced to negotiate seriously as more than a million young men have either been killed or seriously wounded at the front, or have fled the country to avoid conscription.

But to extract real concessions from Moscow, Trump must immediately send long-range weapons to Ukraine, such as Tomahawk missiles, which he has so far refused to provide. Equally important is that the United States strengthen the level of secondary sanctions against anyone doing business with Moscow and encourage Europe to freeze Russian funds (estimated at up to $300 billion) held in European banks.

However, these are short-term issues. Only if Kiev gains a real sense of security can there be a legitimate and stable agreement along the current front lines, the columnist notes. The West must start formulating now stable negotiating positions that will guarantee the permanent security of Ukraine. There is also previous history: NATO and its Western allies provided such guarantees to Kosovo in the late 1990s, in the face of Serbian aggression.

The plan for Ukraine must learn from Kosovo and build on security guarantees for sea, air, land and cyberspace.

As a first step, Ukraine must have assurances that the Russian Black Sea Fleet will not attempt to strangle its trade, particularly exports of agricultural products and potash. Before the conflict, Ukraine was the “breadbasket of Europe”, and under any future peace settlement, its ability to export wheat and other products through Odessa and other ports will be crucial to its economy.

A permanent NATO naval presence would be essential, with two or three destroyers or frigates on standby, a corresponding number of minelayers and adequate air cover, including long-range naval patrol aircraft such as the US-made P-8 Poseidon. This force could operate from NATO naval bases in Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey. It would be analogous to NATO’s intervention a quarter of a century ago to protect landlocked, isolated Kosovo: it then set up a naval force in the Adriatic that ensured Serbia could not get weapons by sea.

In the air, the most important defensive element would be the establishment of a no-fly zone over the rest of Ukraine, enforced by NATO fighters and the Ukrainian air force. As more and more US F-16s find their way into Kiev’s hands via European allies, this could materialize immediately, with NATO and Ukrainian air forces working together. NATO air base in Ramstein, Germany, would be the headquarters for the no-fly zone, which could be enforced by 40 to 50 NATO aircraft: fighters on patrol and AWACS aircraft for command and control.

The attack would rely on long-range missiles such as the Tomahawk, with a range of 1,500 miles. A missile arsenal, in the hands of Ukraine, would pose a significant threat to critical Russian economic infrastructure, particularly oil and gas systems. In Kosovo, NATO imposed a no-fly zone and used cruise missiles against targets in the Serbian capital, Belgrade, including the defense ministry.

Onshore security guarantees will need more political management. Moscow will strongly oppose a NATO military mission in Ukraine, but the presence of at least 10,000 troops from NATO member states operating under their national flags, an “alliance of the willing,” may become necessary. It will essentially be forces that will come mainly from NATO’s border countries: Poland, the Baltic countries, Finland and Sweden. They could operate under a single commander, possibly a Polish general, who would be subordinate to the European Union, and be deployed in five major sectors along the new Ukrainian-Russian border.

Accordingly, in Kosovo there was a NATO mission of around 17,000 troops, as well as a strong presence of the European Union. Today, NATO strength has been reduced to a few thousand men as peace has largely been maintained.

Another part of the security guarantees on the ground should be permanent access to Kiev to land warfare systems from its Western backers, such as ammunition, artillery, tanks, mines and other essential means of ground operations. This supply line already exists to a large extent and just needs to be institutionalized through negotiations. He could remain under the supervision of the head of the US European Command (EUCOM) based in Stuttgart, Germany.

Finally, Ukraine will need protection from Russian cyberattacks. Although the Ukrainians have developed significant defensive – and to some extent offensive – cyber warfare technology, the assistance of a US cyber defense force is necessary. This could operate under the US Cyber ​​Command, based at Fort Meade in Maryland. This group would also help ensure Ukraine’s space connectivity through Starlink systems and other tactical networks.

With such a package of sea, air, land and cyber security guarantees, Ukraine could realistically consider a “land for peace” deal. While the prospect of Putin retaining permanent control over 20 percent of Ukraine is repulsive, developments on the ground seem to make that outcome inevitable, according to the Bloomberg columnist.

The only realistic way forward is, therefore, for the West to negotiate meaningful guarantees that will ensure long-term prosperity and security for Ukraine. That means planning now, in detail, for its implementation and preparing for a US-Russia summit that will have real meaning.