E3 sets Ukraine peace terms

Britain, France and Germany put five conditions for ending Russia's war in Ukraine on paper on Sunday, giving Europe its clearest negotiating position since the full-scale invasion began. The striking part was the machinery used to produce it: not the EU's foreign policy system, but a smaller format that left it outside the room.

The London summit brought together Starmer, Macron, Merz and Zelensky under the "E3+Ukraine" banner. No EU officials attended. No other member states were invited. Kaja Kallas, the EU's foreign policy chief, was chairing a defence ministers' meeting in Cyprus on the same day.

What the Conditions Demand

The joint statement sets out five demands. There would be an immediate ceasefire, with the current front line used as the starting point for talks rather than accepted as a permanent border. Ukraine would keep the right to choose its alliances, which is a clear reference to possible NATO membership.

The three governments also promise legally binding security guarantees, including a multinational force on the ground once a ceasefire holds. That builds on commitments made by Berlin in December 2025 and Paris in January 2026. Frozen Russian central bank assets would remain locked until Moscow pays reparations (SCMP, n-tv).

The fifth condition matters most. Any peace deal touching EU or NATO structures would need approval from EU member states and NATO allies. In practice, that gives Europe a structural veto over any bilateral arrangement between Washington and Moscow.

After months of Trump-Putin phone calls, a collapsed ceasefire in May and Russian drone strikes that violated Moscow's own truce, the E3 leaders are spelling out the fear in European capitals: that a deal could arrive fully formed, with Ukraine and the rest of Europe asked to live with terms they did not shape.

Why Three Capitals, Not Twenty-Seven

The E3 format exists because Britain has left the EU but remains, with France, one of Europe's largest military spenders. A full European Council summit, where all 27 heads of state and government set the bloc's direction, would require consensus. Hungary and Slovakia are positioned to obstruct. Three capitals can move quickly and define the terms before others water them down.

That speed comes with a political price. Poland, Ukraine's most committed eastern European ally and the EU's highest defence spender as a share of GDP, had no seat at the table. The format leaves two-thirds of EU member states watching from the side on a question that will define European security for a generation.

Merz arrived in London with weaker leverage than he might have wanted. Two weeks before the summit, Zelensky publicly rejected his main proposal for Ukraine's EU future: "associated membership" without voting rights. Zelensky called it "unfair."

Yet Merz still signed a joint statement affirming Ukraine's right to choose its alliances and promising binding security guarantees. The gap between what Germany offers on its own and what it signs collectively suggests the E3 format can hide weaker national positions inside stronger shared language.

The Test Ahead

The declaration is a political document, not a binding instrument. It commits no parliament and creates no enforceable obligation. Russia has not formally responded, though Putin dismissed Zelensky's pre-summit peace overture as insincere days before the meeting.

The real test comes at the NATO summit in Ankara on July 7-8, where the E3 position will meet American negotiating preferences and Turkish hosting leverage. If this format becomes permanent, the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy, the treaty-based system meant to give Europe a unified voice abroad, risks becoming a technical backend for sanctions and reconstruction.

Three capitals would set the political direction. Twenty-four others would be left to implement it.