New Leaked Macron Warning Raises Fears the US Could Abandon Ukraine
Leaked notes from a call between European leaders and Volodymyr Zelenskyy suggest the United States may be preparing to push a territorial deal on Ukraine without firm security guarantees – reviving old European doubts about Washington’s reliability and forcing difficult choices in London, Paris, Berlin and Kyiv.
Key Points
A leaked summary of a recent call shows Emmanuel Macron warning Zelenskyy that the US could “betray Ukraine on territory” without clear long-term security guarantees.
The warning comes amid a controversial multi-point US peace proposal and an unofficial Trump-linked diplomatic mission to Moscow that many in Europe see as tilted towards Russia’s demands.
European leaders, including Germany’s Friedrich Merz and NATO chief Mark Rutte, reportedly voiced deep concern and urged that Ukraine not be left “alone with these guys”.
The leak highlights a widening rift between Washington and its European allies over how fast – and on what terms – to push for a Ukraine peace deal.
For the UK and Europe, an imposed settlement that rewards Russian territorial gains would be a strategic shock, forcing a rethink of security guarantees, defence spending and long-term relations with Washington.
Background and Context
A grinding war and a shifting diplomatic landscape
Nearly three years into Russia’s full-scale invasion, Ukraine’s battlefield gains have stalled and the front line has hardened into a costly stalemate. Western publics are fatigued, ammunition stockpiles are under pressure, and governments are wrestling with competing domestic priorities.
At the same time, Washington has tried to seize the diplomatic initiative. A detailed US proposal to halt the war – drafted largely without European input – has been circulated to Kyiv and Moscow. Critics in Europe say the plan mirrors too many of the Kremlin’s maximalist demands, especially on borders and future Ukrainian neutrality.
Layered onto this is the personal diplomacy of President Donald Trump’s circle. Envoy and property developer Steve Witkoff, accompanied by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, has recently travelled to Moscow for lengthy talks with Vladimir Putin before planned meetings with Ukrainian officials in the US.
It is against this backdrop – an ambitious but controversial US plan and unusual quasi-backchannel diplomacy – that the Macron leak has exploded into public view.
What Has Happened: The Leaked Macron Warning
The call that set off alarm bells
According to reporting based on an English-language summary note, Emmanuel Macron told Volodymyr Zelenskyy on a recent call with several European leaders:
“There is a possibility that the US could betray Ukraine on the question of territory, without clarity on security guarantees.”
The French president is said to have described the current phase of negotiations as harbouring “a big danger” for Zelenskyy personally – language that suggests both political and security risks if Kyiv is pressured into a deal it cannot sell at home.
The alleged leak also contains:
German chancellor Friedrich Merz urging Zelenskyy to be “very careful”, and warning that “they are playing games with both you and us” – interpreted as a reference to the Trump-linked mission to Moscow.
Finland’s president Alexander Stubb reportedly saying, “We must not leave Ukraine and Volodymyr alone with these guys.”
NATO secretary general Mark Rutte agreeing that Europe must “protect Volodymyr”.
Several participants have confirmed that the call took place and that the quotations broadly match their recollection, though the Élysée has pushed back on the wording attributed to Macron.
Europe’s internal debate made public
What makes this leak so sensitive is that it exposes private European fears about the direction of US policy: that Washington might seek a rapid end to the war, even if that means locking in Russian territorial gains and leaving Ukraine with vague or unenforceable security guarantees.
It also highlights a more uncomfortable point: key European leaders increasingly see the US not just as an indispensable ally, but as a potential risk factor in their own security calculations.
Why It Matters – and Who It Affects
For Ukraine: pressure, risk and limited room to manoeuvre
For Kyiv, the implications are immediate and personal:
Territorial integrity vs survival – Any US-backed deal that accepts Russian control over occupied territory cuts directly against Ukraine’s core red line. Agreeing to such a deal could fracture domestic politics and be seen as a betrayal of soldiers and civilians who have sacrificed since 2014.
Security guarantees in doubt – Without iron-clad commitments from NATO powers – including clear conditions for military support if Russia attacks again – Ukraine risks a “frozen conflict” that Moscow can thaw at will.
Personal risk for Zelenskyy – Macron’s reported warning about “big danger” for Zelenskyy acknowledges that a leader who signs a bad peace may face not just electoral blowback but potential destabilisation, including from radicalised veterans or political opponents accusing him of capitulation.
For Europe: independence vs dependence
For European governments, the leak revives a long-standing anxiety: what happens if the US strategic umbrella becomes conditional, transactional or simply unreliable?
Key concerns include:
US domestic politics – The Ukraine war has become entangled with polarised US debates over spending, borders and “forever wars”. A change of mood in Washington can rapidly reshape policy.
Strategic autonomy – Leaders such as Macron and Merz have pushed the idea that Europe must be able to defend its own interests even when Washington’s priorities diverge. That means more spending, more industrial capacity and more political will in Europe itself.
Precedent for aggression – If Russia emerges with recognised territorial gains after a war of conquest, the signal to other would-be aggressors – from the Indo-Pacific to Europe’s own neighbourhood – could be profound.
For the UK: squeezed between Washington and Europe
The UK has been one of Ukraine’s staunchest supporters in NATO, providing weapons, training and intelligence, and pushing for a hard line on Russia. London also prides itself on the “special relationship” with Washington.
Macron’s warning creates a potential dilemma for any British government:
Does the UK align reflexively with US diplomacy, even if it tilts towards Russian demands?
Or does it side more clearly with European partners arguing for a tougher line, even if that means publicly challenging Washington?
For a Britain already outside the EU but still deeply embedded in European security, this is not just a theoretical question – it goes to the heart of post-Brexit foreign policy identity.
The Big Picture: A Test of Western Unity
A fracture line in the Western coalition
The war in Ukraine has, until now, been framed as a story of impressive Western unity: sanctions, arms deliveries, diplomatic isolation of Moscow.
The Macron leak shows where that unity could break: not over whether Ukraine should survive, but over what “peace” actually looks like.
Broadly, three tendencies are emerging:
The “deal now” camp – Those who prioritise ending the war quickly, limiting costs and freeing up resources, even if that means painful concessions by Kyiv.
The “justice and deterrence” camp – Those who argue that anything short of reversing Russian aggression will embolden Moscow and others, making Europe less safe in the long run.
The “hedging” camp – Actors trying to keep a foot in both worlds, talking up support for Ukraine while quietly exploring ways to limit commitments if domestic politics turn.
The leaked call suggests key European leaders fear Washington is drifting into the first category, while they see themselves as trapped between the second and the third.
A wider signal to Moscow – and Beijing
For the Kremlin, the leak is useful propaganda. It reinforces the narrative that Western unity is crumbling and that time is on Russia’s side. If Moscow concludes that the US is eager for a deal, it may harden its demands, not soften them.
Beyond Russia, other capitals – notably Beijing – will be watching closely. If the US appears willing to compromise on core principles like territorial integrity when costs mount, that will factor into calculations over Taiwan and other flashpoints.
What to Watch Next
1. Washington’s public and private response
Official denials or clarifications – The White House and State Department will likely stress ongoing support for Ukraine and downplay talk of “betrayal”. The wording – especially around territory and security guarantees – will be important.
Congressional reaction – Key Republican and Democratic figures may seize on the leak to either attack or defend the administration’s approach, telling us how much domestic room for manoeuvre Washington really has.
2. European follow-through
Use of frozen Russian assets – German leaders, among others, have pushed harder for repurposing frozen Russian state assets to fund Ukraine’s defence and reconstruction, a move that would signal European willingness to act even if US enthusiasm fades.
Defence spending and industrial ramp-up – Expect renewed pressure inside the EU and UK to boost shells, air defence systems and long-range weapons production, reducing reliance on US stockpiles.
Security guarantees “made in Europe” – Bilateral or mini-lateral defence pacts with Ukraine, led by states such as the UK, France, Poland and the Nordics, may gain momentum as a complement – or insurance policy – to any US-brokered deal.
3. Kyiv’s red lines and domestic politics
Public messaging from Zelenskyy – How firmly Kyiv rejects territorial concessions will shape Western room for manoeuvre. Any softening of language will be scrutinised at home and abroad.
Internal Ukrainian debate – As the human and economic costs mount, pressure will grow inside Ukraine for clarity on what victory, or acceptable peace, actually means. The leak gives ammunition both to those insisting on no compromise and to those arguing that the West may not back maximalist goals forever.
4. UK positioning
In London, watch for:
Statements from the prime minister and foreign secretary on any US–Russia or US–Ukraine talks.
Concrete moves on defence spending, especially artillery, drones and air defence.
Efforts to deepen UK–EU security cooperation despite wider post-Brexit tensions.
A Warning Europe Cannot Ignore
The leaked Macron warning does not prove that Washington has already decided to abandon Ukraine. It does, however, confirm that some of Europe’s most powerful leaders believe that is a real risk – serious enough to confront Zelenskyy with in private.
For Ukraine, that belief alone is destabilising. For Europe and the UK, it is a reminder that outsourcing security – whether to American voters, American budgets or American political moods – has hard limits.
Whatever happens with the US peace plan, the message from this leak is stark: if Europe wants a say in how the war in Ukraine ends – and in what follows – it will have to shoulder more of the burden itself.
