Persistent disagreements between the Trump administration and Ukrainian officials over the duration, legal enforceability, and linkage to territorial concessions continue to block any formal bilateral security guarantee ahead of the June 30 deadline. The United States has floated a 15-year framework tied to broader peace negotiations, while Ukraine insists on a minimum 20-year binding commitment that includes explicit provisions for post-ceasefire support forces. Diplomatic sessions earlier in 2026 yielded no signed agreement or congressional submission, and no recent official announcements signal breakthrough progress. With limited time remaining and stalled talks, trader consensus assigns very low probability to a completed deal by the cutoff.
Polymarket ডেটা রেফারেন্স করে পরীক্ষামূলক AI-জেনারেটেড সারাংশ। এটি ট্রেডিং পরামর্শ নয় এবং এই মার্কেট কীভাবে রেজলভ হয় তাতে কোনো ভূমিকা রাখে না। · আপডেটেডU.S. agrees to give Ukraine security guarantee by June 30?
U.S. agrees to give Ukraine security guarantee by June 30?
$147,021 Vol.
$147,021 Vol.
Dec 31, 2026
$147,021 Vol.
$147,021 Vol.
Dec 31, 2026
This market will resolve to “Yes” if the United States formally commits to giving Ukraine a security guarantee, defined as a publicly announced and mutually agreed deal between the Trump administration and the Government of Ukraine which creates a binding obligation for the United States to defend or directly intervene on Ukraine’s behalf, by June 30, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No.”
A qualifying “security guarantee” requires language that is equivalent in character to a NATO Article 5–style mutual defense commitment: the United States must commit to responding militarily if Ukraine is attacked, or otherwise guarantee Ukraine’s defense through binding defense obligations. Examples of qualifying language include commitments modeled on the US treaties with Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines, or NATO's Article 5 instrument, which obligates the United States to “act to meet the common danger” through military force if an ally is attacked. Cooperative frameworks, capacity-building measures, consultative mechanisms, or nonbinding pledges will not qualify.
Examples of non-qualifying arrangements include the June 13, 2024 US–Ukraine bilateral security agreement, the Taiwan Relations Act, or G7/EU “security arrangements” that provide support or consultation but stop short of binding defense guarantees.
A qualifying agreement must be jointly announced and finalized, and take the form of a treaty, executive agreement, memorandum of understanding, joint declaration, or equivalent written instrument. Announcements which are statements of intent, contingent, exploratory, or otherwise not indicative of a formalized policy will not count.
The primary resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.Persistent disagreements between the Trump administration and Ukrainian officials over the duration, legal enforceability, and linkage to territorial concessions continue to block any formal bilateral security guarantee ahead of the June 30 deadline. The United States has floated a 15-year framework tied to broader peace negotiations, while Ukraine insists on a minimum 20-year binding commitment that includes explicit provisions for post-ceasefire support forces. Diplomatic sessions earlier in 2026 yielded no signed agreement or congressional submission, and no recent official announcements signal breakthrough progress. With limited time remaining and stalled talks, trader consensus assigns very low probability to a completed deal by the cutoff.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if the United States formally commits to giving Ukraine a security guarantee, defined as a publicly announced and mutually agreed deal between the Trump administration and the Government of Ukraine which creates a binding obligation for the United States to defend or directly intervene on Ukraine’s behalf, by June 30, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No.”
A qualifying “security guarantee” requires language that is equivalent in character to a NATO Article 5–style mutual defense commitment: the United States must commit to responding militarily if Ukraine is attacked, or otherwise guarantee Ukraine’s defense through binding defense obligations. Examples of qualifying language include commitments modeled on the US treaties with Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines, or NATO's Article 5 instrument, which obligates the United States to “act to meet the common danger” through military force if an ally is attacked. Cooperative frameworks, capacity-building measures, consultative mechanisms, or nonbinding pledges will not qualify.
Examples of non-qualifying arrangements include the June 13, 2024 US–Ukraine bilateral security agreement, the Taiwan Relations Act, or G7/EU “security arrangements” that provide support or consultation but stop short of binding defense guarantees.
A qualifying agreement must be jointly announced and finalized, and take the form of a treaty, executive agreement, memorandum of understanding, joint declaration, or equivalent written instrument. Announcements which are statements of intent, contingent, exploratory, or otherwise not indicative of a formalized policy will not count.
The primary resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.
A qualifying “security guarantee” requires language that is equivalent in character to a NATO Article 5–style mutual defense commitment: the United States must commit to responding militarily if Ukraine is attacked, or otherwise guarantee Ukraine’s defense through binding defense obligations. Examples of qualifying language include commitments modeled on the US treaties with Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines, or NATO's Article 5 instrument, which obligates the United States to “act to meet the common danger” through military force if an ally is attacked. Cooperative frameworks, capacity-building measures, consultative mechanisms, or nonbinding pledges will not qualify.
Examples of non-qualifying arrangements include the June 13, 2024 US–Ukraine bilateral security agreement, the Taiwan Relations Act, or G7/EU “security arrangements” that provide support or consultation but stop short of binding defense guarantees.
A qualifying agreement must be jointly announced and finalized, and take the form of a treaty, executive agreement, memorandum of understanding, joint declaration, or equivalent written instrument. Announcements which are statements of intent, contingent, exploratory, or otherwise not indicative of a formalized policy will not count.
The primary resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.
মার্কেট ওপেন হয়েছে: Dec 28, 2025, 6:02 PM ET
ভলিউম
$147,021শেষ তারিখ
Jun 30, 2026মার্কেট ওপেন হয়েছে
Dec 28, 2025, 6:02 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...This market will resolve to “Yes” if the United States formally commits to giving Ukraine a security guarantee, defined as a publicly announced and mutually agreed deal between the Trump administration and the Government of Ukraine which creates a binding obligation for the United States to defend or directly intervene on Ukraine’s behalf, by June 30, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No.”
A qualifying “security guarantee” requires language that is equivalent in character to a NATO Article 5–style mutual defense commitment: the United States must commit to responding militarily if Ukraine is attacked, or otherwise guarantee Ukraine’s defense through binding defense obligations. Examples of qualifying language include commitments modeled on the US treaties with Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines, or NATO's Article 5 instrument, which obligates the United States to “act to meet the common danger” through military force if an ally is attacked. Cooperative frameworks, capacity-building measures, consultative mechanisms, or nonbinding pledges will not qualify.
Examples of non-qualifying arrangements include the June 13, 2024 US–Ukraine bilateral security agreement, the Taiwan Relations Act, or G7/EU “security arrangements” that provide support or consultation but stop short of binding defense guarantees.
A qualifying agreement must be jointly announced and finalized, and take the form of a treaty, executive agreement, memorandum of understanding, joint declaration, or equivalent written instrument. Announcements which are statements of intent, contingent, exploratory, or otherwise not indicative of a formalized policy will not count.
The primary resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.Persistent disagreements between the Trump administration and Ukrainian officials over the duration, legal enforceability, and linkage to territorial concessions continue to block any formal bilateral security guarantee ahead of the June 30 deadline. The United States has floated a 15-year framework tied to broader peace negotiations, while Ukraine insists on a minimum 20-year binding commitment that includes explicit provisions for post-ceasefire support forces. Diplomatic sessions earlier in 2026 yielded no signed agreement or congressional submission, and no recent official announcements signal breakthrough progress. With limited time remaining and stalled talks, trader consensus assigns very low probability to a completed deal by the cutoff.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if the United States formally commits to giving Ukraine a security guarantee, defined as a publicly announced and mutually agreed deal between the Trump administration and the Government of Ukraine which creates a binding obligation for the United States to defend or directly intervene on Ukraine’s behalf, by June 30, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No.”
A qualifying “security guarantee” requires language that is equivalent in character to a NATO Article 5–style mutual defense commitment: the United States must commit to responding militarily if Ukraine is attacked, or otherwise guarantee Ukraine’s defense through binding defense obligations. Examples of qualifying language include commitments modeled on the US treaties with Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines, or NATO's Article 5 instrument, which obligates the United States to “act to meet the common danger” through military force if an ally is attacked. Cooperative frameworks, capacity-building measures, consultative mechanisms, or nonbinding pledges will not qualify.
Examples of non-qualifying arrangements include the June 13, 2024 US–Ukraine bilateral security agreement, the Taiwan Relations Act, or G7/EU “security arrangements” that provide support or consultation but stop short of binding defense guarantees.
A qualifying agreement must be jointly announced and finalized, and take the form of a treaty, executive agreement, memorandum of understanding, joint declaration, or equivalent written instrument. Announcements which are statements of intent, contingent, exploratory, or otherwise not indicative of a formalized policy will not count.
The primary resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.
A qualifying “security guarantee” requires language that is equivalent in character to a NATO Article 5–style mutual defense commitment: the United States must commit to responding militarily if Ukraine is attacked, or otherwise guarantee Ukraine’s defense through binding defense obligations. Examples of qualifying language include commitments modeled on the US treaties with Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines, or NATO's Article 5 instrument, which obligates the United States to “act to meet the common danger” through military force if an ally is attacked. Cooperative frameworks, capacity-building measures, consultative mechanisms, or nonbinding pledges will not qualify.
Examples of non-qualifying arrangements include the June 13, 2024 US–Ukraine bilateral security agreement, the Taiwan Relations Act, or G7/EU “security arrangements” that provide support or consultation but stop short of binding defense guarantees.
A qualifying agreement must be jointly announced and finalized, and take the form of a treaty, executive agreement, memorandum of understanding, joint declaration, or equivalent written instrument. Announcements which are statements of intent, contingent, exploratory, or otherwise not indicative of a formalized policy will not count.
The primary resolution source will be a consensus of credible reporting.
ভলিউম
$147,021শেষ তারিখ
Dec 31, 2026মার্কেট ওপেন হয়েছে
Dec 28, 2025, 6:02 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...Persistent disagreements between the Trump administration and Ukrainian officials over the duration, legal enforceability, and linkage to territorial concessions continue to block any formal bilateral security guarantee ahead of the June 30 deadline. The United States has floated a 15-year framework tied to broader peace negotiations, while Ukraine insists on a minimum 20-year binding commitment that includes explicit provisions for post-ceasefire support forces. Diplomatic sessions earlier in 2026 yielded no signed agreement or congressional submission, and no recent official announcements signal breakthrough progress. With limited time remaining and stalled talks, trader consensus assigns very low probability to a completed deal by the cutoff.
Polymarket ডেটা রেফারেন্স করে পরীক্ষামূলক AI-জেনারেটেড সারাংশ। এটি ট্রেডিং পরামর্শ নয় এবং এই মার্কেট কীভাবে রেজলভ হয় তাতে কোনো ভূমিকা রাখে না। · আপডেটেড
বাহ্যিক লিংক থেকে সাবধান।
বাহ্যিক লিংক থেকে সাবধান।
সচরাচর জিজ্ঞাসা