On Friday, 28 March 2025, the Foreign Policy Research Institute and the Centre for Strategic Studies, with the organisational support of the Directorate-General for Rendering Services to Diplomatic Missions, held a roundtable entitled Eastern Shield of Europe without NATO, US, and Ukraine: Probable Models of European Security. Among the attendees were representatives of the diplomatic corps, including Charge d’Affaires of Latvia Kristaps Purmalis and Ambassador of Finland Tarja Fernández, as well as staff members of the Embassies of Georgia, Indonesia, Iraq, Lithuania, the United States and the NATO Representation.
Hryhorii Perepelytsia, Director of the Foreign Policy Research Institute, Doctor of Political Science, full professor at the Department of International Relations and Foreign Policy of the Educational and Scientific Institute of International Relations of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Captain 1st rank, moderated the event.
In his introductory remarks, Mr Perepelytsia explained the issues raised for discussion, highlighting russia’s aspirations to fundamentally reshape the world order with the support of the United States, as well as the challenges faced by Europe:
‘The topic of today’s roundtable was born in the context of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s presentation of the East Shield defence project, which envisages the creation of a defence consortium on the border with russia, starting from the Baltic Sea along the border of Belarus, russia, and through Ukraine without Ukraine’s involvement. However, the situation is far more complex. We are currently witnessing a lack of unity in the European community. Today we are going to make a general forecast of the prospects for European security. It is still uncertain because the cooperative security system in Europe that existed after the end of the Cold War has been completely dismantled. The situation is influenced by the russian-Ukrainian war, which has already become global; and it is evident that wars of such scale inevitably lead to a global redistribution of spheres of influence. We see both the US and russia attempting to reach an agreement to forge a global geopolitical deal. Therefore, peace talks between Ukraine and russia are merely a fragment of the global plans that the US and russia are developing.’
The roundtable brought together Pavlo Zhovnirenko, Chairman of the Board of the Center for Strategic Studies; Volodymyr Havrylov, Deputy Minister of Defence of Ukraine (2022–23), Defence Attaché of Ukraine to the United States (2015–18), reserve Major General of the Armed Forces of Ukraine; Mykola Sunhurovskyi, Military Programmes Director at the Razumkov Centre; Yehor Brailian, associate professor at the Department of International Relations and Strategic Studies of the Kyiv Aviation Institute; Glen Grant, military expert, retired British Army Lieutenant Colonel (online).
In his speech, Volodymyr Havrylov emphasised that Ukraine is a crucial pillar in the architecture of European international security, as it defines the level of security through its experience in technological warfare:
‘Ukraine is the only country that has successfully held back Putin’s huge yet paper-thin empire. We have learnt to fight in a different way — not just in terms of motivation, but through the application of new technologies in warfare, avoiding outdated, ineffective strategies. Today, the strength of the battlefield is no longer measured by the sheer number of troops or equipment but by proactivity, creativity, brainpower, adaptability, and the technologies you can use instead of the old approaches to warfare. The Ukrainian army has demonstrated to other countries how to fight creatively and effectively counter any adversary with minimal resources but immense energy. Therefore, Ukraine is destined to become an integral part of the European security system.’
For his part, Mykola Sunhurovskyi outlined the possible directions in US-russia relations, considering the ambitions of their leaders, and stressed that the architecture of international security must be shaped with an awareness of all possible threats and a proper allocation of resources to overcome them:
‘When it comes to the European security architecture, it depends on how broad the threat analysis is — not only from russia but in general. Any threat has a geographical location, a specific source, and ways of implementation. We should approach threats only in such a coordinate system, otherwise, attention and efforts are simply scattered. The European Union faces threats not only from russia but also from the Mediterranean region, North Africa, Islamic State, climate change, pandemics, and more. In other words, there are many such threats. Security architecture must be built around three core elements: geographical positioning, sources of threats, and available resources. Depending on the context, the security architecture could either constitute a pan-European system divided into key areas or consist of sub-regional alliances in these areas. The resolution of these complex issues will determine both the structure of international security architecture and Ukraine’s role within it.’
Pavlo Zhovnirenko addressed the inadequacies of existing international organisations as guarantors of security, the basic principles of building a security architecture, the role of dictators, and the creation of a new paradigm of accountability for crimes against humanity:
‘Any new model of European security that excludes Ukraine will fail to provide security and will not meet Ukraine’s national interests. The United Nations, which once aimed to unite all states, must be replaced by a new organisation — the United Exclusive Nations with stable democracies and aspirants to democracy. The effectiveness of such an alliance will be ensured by a founding principle identical to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, a simple and swift mechanism for investigating crimes and delivering verdicts to criminal leaders, unavoidable punishment, enforced by the immediate mobilisation of the armed forces and intelligence services of all member states to ensure the execution of the sentence.’
In his report, Yehor Brailian elaborated on the feasibility of creating international alliances to build a security architecture through the lens of the UK’s foreign policy, arguing that Ukraine must play an active role in building a new security system:
‘We must come up with concrete proposals, because without Ukraine, the future of European security, and the future in general, is impossible. If Western nations, including the UK, are ready to support freedom of maritime navigation and other critical international security issues, then they should listen to what Ukraine has to say. This war is being fought with cutting-edge technology, and we can only defeat russia if we maintain technological superiority.’
According to Glenn Grant, trust, anti-corruption, and technological progress are important components for building strong relations between countries that can shape the international security architecture. During his speech, the expert assured of the UK’s continued support for Ukraine and noted that international security is impossible without Ukraine’s participation in its organisation:
‘Ukraine has got to be at the centre of any security architecture — and if it’s not, then we’ve all wasted time.’
During the event, the speakers covered a number of conceptual issues, offering expert assessments of Ukraine’s current geopolitical situation. These included: lessons from the two World Wars and averting World War III; the modern geopolitical context of the changes in Central and Eastern Europe: ‘Farewell, NATO’. But what to replace it with?; what future awaits the EU now that it faces the russian and Chinese threats alone?; Europe and the challenge of the russian-American partnership: back to ‘Yalta-2’?; Future models of European security in the event of a dramatic transformation of the global order: Creation of a European army as a substitute for NATO; European defence alliance without Ukraine, with the latter remaining in a buffer or grey area and a neutral and nuclear status; Creation of an Eastern Shield of Europe instead of NATO without Ukraine; Formation of a Baltic-Black Sea British-Ukrainian alliance.
Scholars, university professors and students, as well as diplomats, actively joined the discussion.
