Recent multilateral declarations from the Coalition of the Willing, including the January 2026 Paris statement and subsequent European strategic partnership talks, have emphasized political and legal commitments to support Ukraine in the event of renewed Russian aggression, yet these fall short of the binding bilateral defense obligations required for market resolution. European governments continue to prioritize financial aid packages, military training, and sanctions coordination over formal mutual-defense treaties that would mandate direct intervention. Domestic constitutional constraints and the conditioning of deeper guarantees on progress toward a U.S.-facilitated ceasefire further limit near-term bilateral deals. Trader consensus for a “No” outcome reflects this distinction between announced intentions and ratified, enforceable security pacts. A sudden bilateral treaty signed before the June 30 deadline, potentially linked to accelerated peace negotiations, remains the primary scenario that could still shift probabilities.
Polymarketデータを参照したAI生成の実験的な要約。これは取引アドバイスではなく、このマーケットの解決方法には一切関係ありません。 · 更新日はい
$123,409 Vol.
$123,409 Vol.
2026/06/30
はい
$123,409 Vol.
$123,409 Vol.
2026/06/30
This market will resolve to “Yes” if any European country formally commits to giving Ukraine a security guarantee, defined as a publicly announced and mutually agreed deal between the relevant European country and the Government of Ukraine which creates a binding obligation for the relevant European country 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 relevant European country 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.
Qualifying European countries include: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czechia; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Iceland; Ireland; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Malta; Moldova; Monaco; Montenegro; Netherlands; North Macedonia; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; San Marino; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Ukraine; United Kingdom.Recent multilateral declarations from the Coalition of the Willing, including the January 2026 Paris statement and subsequent European strategic partnership talks, have emphasized political and legal commitments to support Ukraine in the event of renewed Russian aggression, yet these fall short of the binding bilateral defense obligations required for market resolution. European governments continue to prioritize financial aid packages, military training, and sanctions coordination over formal mutual-defense treaties that would mandate direct intervention. Domestic constitutional constraints and the conditioning of deeper guarantees on progress toward a U.S.-facilitated ceasefire further limit near-term bilateral deals. Trader consensus for a “No” outcome reflects this distinction between announced intentions and ratified, enforceable security pacts. A sudden bilateral treaty signed before the June 30 deadline, potentially linked to accelerated peace negotiations, remains the primary scenario that could still shift probabilities.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if any European country formally commits to giving Ukraine a security guarantee, defined as a publicly announced and mutually agreed deal between the relevant European country and the Government of Ukraine which creates a binding obligation for the relevant European country 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 relevant European country 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.
Qualifying European countries include: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czechia; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Iceland; Ireland; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Malta; Moldova; Monaco; Montenegro; Netherlands; North Macedonia; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; San Marino; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Ukraine; United Kingdom.
A qualifying “security guarantee” requires language that is equivalent in character to a NATO Article 5–style mutual defense commitment: the relevant European country 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.
Qualifying European countries include: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czechia; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Iceland; Ireland; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Malta; Moldova; Monaco; Montenegro; Netherlands; North Macedonia; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; San Marino; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Ukraine; United Kingdom.
マーケット開始日： Dec 28, 2025, 6:06 PM ET
音量
$123,409終了日
2026/06/30マーケット開始日
Dec 28, 2025, 6:06 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...This market will resolve to “Yes” if any European country formally commits to giving Ukraine a security guarantee, defined as a publicly announced and mutually agreed deal between the relevant European country and the Government of Ukraine which creates a binding obligation for the relevant European country 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 relevant European country 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.
Qualifying European countries include: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czechia; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Iceland; Ireland; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Malta; Moldova; Monaco; Montenegro; Netherlands; North Macedonia; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; San Marino; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Ukraine; United Kingdom.Recent multilateral declarations from the Coalition of the Willing, including the January 2026 Paris statement and subsequent European strategic partnership talks, have emphasized political and legal commitments to support Ukraine in the event of renewed Russian aggression, yet these fall short of the binding bilateral defense obligations required for market resolution. European governments continue to prioritize financial aid packages, military training, and sanctions coordination over formal mutual-defense treaties that would mandate direct intervention. Domestic constitutional constraints and the conditioning of deeper guarantees on progress toward a U.S.-facilitated ceasefire further limit near-term bilateral deals. Trader consensus for a “No” outcome reflects this distinction between announced intentions and ratified, enforceable security pacts. A sudden bilateral treaty signed before the June 30 deadline, potentially linked to accelerated peace negotiations, remains the primary scenario that could still shift probabilities.
This market will resolve to “Yes” if any European country formally commits to giving Ukraine a security guarantee, defined as a publicly announced and mutually agreed deal between the relevant European country and the Government of Ukraine which creates a binding obligation for the relevant European country 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 relevant European country 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.
Qualifying European countries include: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czechia; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Iceland; Ireland; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Malta; Moldova; Monaco; Montenegro; Netherlands; North Macedonia; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; San Marino; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Ukraine; United Kingdom.
A qualifying “security guarantee” requires language that is equivalent in character to a NATO Article 5–style mutual defense commitment: the relevant European country 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.
Qualifying European countries include: Albania; Andorra; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czechia; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Iceland; Ireland; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Malta; Moldova; Monaco; Montenegro; Netherlands; North Macedonia; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; San Marino; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Ukraine; United Kingdom.
音量
$123,409終了日
2026/06/30マーケット開始日
Dec 28, 2025, 6:06 PM ETResolver
0x65070BE91...Recent multilateral declarations from the Coalition of the Willing, including the January 2026 Paris statement and subsequent European strategic partnership talks, have emphasized political and legal commitments to support Ukraine in the event of renewed Russian aggression, yet these fall short of the binding bilateral defense obligations required for market resolution. European governments continue to prioritize financial aid packages, military training, and sanctions coordination over formal mutual-defense treaties that would mandate direct intervention. Domestic constitutional constraints and the conditioning of deeper guarantees on progress toward a U.S.-facilitated ceasefire further limit near-term bilateral deals. Trader consensus for a “No” outcome reflects this distinction between announced intentions and ratified, enforceable security pacts. A sudden bilateral treaty signed before the June 30 deadline, potentially linked to accelerated peace negotiations, remains the primary scenario that could still shift probabilities.
Polymarketデータを参照したAI生成の実験的な要約。これは取引アドバイスではなく、このマーケットの解決方法には一切関係ありません。 · 更新日
外部リンクに注意してください。
外部リンクに注意してください。
よくある質問