Increasingly alarmed that U.S. security priorities lie elsewhere, a group of European countries has been quietly working on a plan to send troops into Ukraine to help enforce any future peace settlement with Russia.
Britain and France are at the forefront of the effort, though details remain scarce. The countries involved in the discussions are reluctant to tip their hand and give Russian President Vladimir Putin an edge should he agree to negotiate an end to the war he launched three years ago.
What is clear is that Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy needs a guarantee that his country’s security will be assured until peace takes hold. The best protection would be the NATO membership that Ukraine has long been promised, but the U.S. has taken that option off the table.
“I won’t get into the particular capabilities, but I do accept that if there is peace then there needs to be some sort of security guarantee for Ukraine and the U.K. will play its part in that,” British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in cautious remarks on Thursday.
The Europeans began exploring what kind of force might be needed about a year ago, but the sense of urgency has grown amid concern that U.S. President Donald Trump might go over their heads, and possibly even Ukraine’s, to clinch a deal with Putin.
Many questions remain unanswered but one stands out: what role, if any, might the United States play?
European powers consider the road ahead
In December, after Trump was elected but before he took office, a group of leaders and ministers huddled with Zelenskyy at NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte’s residence in Brussels. They came from Britain, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland. Top European Union officials attended too.
The talks built on an idea promoted by French President Emmanuel Macron in early 2024. At the time his refusal to rule out putting troops on the ground in Ukraine prompted an outcry, notably from the leaders of Germany and Poland.
Macron appeared isolated on the European stage, but his plan has gained traction since.
Still, much about what the force might look like and who will take part will depend on the terms of any peace settlement, and more.
Italy has constitutional limits on the use of its forces. The Netherlands would need a greenlight from its parliament, as would Germany, whose position could evolve after the Feb. 23 elections usher in a new government. Poland is cautious, given lingering animosities with Ukraine that date from World War II.
“We are in a very early stage,” Hanno Pevklur, Estonia’s defense minister told The Associated Press on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference.
While there are various ongoing discussions and rumors, it is “critical” for European allies to understand what the contact line in Ukraine will look like before coming up with a plan, Pevkur said.
If Russia and Ukraine reduce their forces along the front line to a “couple of thousand” on both sides, then “it’s not a problem for Europe to also be there,” Pevkur said, pointing out that it would be much harder if there is still a “boiling conflict.”
A robust security force rather than peacekeepers
The makeup and role of the force will be dictated by the kind of peace deal that’s reached. If Russia and Ukraine can agree terms as the negotiations progress, it’s plausible that fewer security precautions and a smaller force would be needed.
But experts and officials warn that, as things stand, the Europeans must deploy a robust and sizeable contingent, rather than a team of peacekeepers like United Nations “blue helmets.”
“It has to be a real force (so) that the Russians know that if they ever tested it that they would get crushed. And you can be sure that Russia will test it,” Ben Hodges, the former Commanding General of U.S. Army Europe, said last month at a European Policy Centre think tank event.
“They violate every single agreement. So if we send a force in there, they’ve got to have airpower, large land forces, drones, counter-drones, air and missile defense. All of that,” he said. “If they go in there with a bunch of blue helmets and rifles, they will get crushed.”
Retired French Gen. Dominique Trinquand, a former head of France’s military mission at the United Nations, agreed that U.N. peacekeepers are better suited “for deployment in zones that are far more stable.”
“For starters, mounting this operation with soldiers taken from across the world would take about a year,” he said.
There also needs to be training of Ukrainian soldiers and investment in Ukraine’s defense industry, Latvia Defense Minister Andris Sprūds told the AP.
How big a force?
The nature of the peace deal will determine the size and location of the European contingent. Zelenskyy has insisted on at least 100,000 to 150,000 troops. Media reports have speculated about a 30,000-40,000 strong force. Diplomats and officials have not confirmed either figure.
Ukraine also wants air support, not just boots on the ground.
What is clear is that the Europeans would struggle to muster a large-scale force, and certainly could not do it quickly.
In an interview on Friday with the Financial Times, Macron said that the idea of deploying a huge force is “far-fetched.”
“We have to do things that are appropriate, realistic, well thought, measured and negotiated,” he said.
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth insisted this week on “robust international oversight of the line of contact,” a reference to the roughly 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) long front line. The Europeans are reluctant as that would require too many troops.
Nearly all agree that some kind of “American backstop” is essential. European armed forces have long relied on superior U.S. logistics, air transport and other military capabilities.
The U.S. lays down some rules
At NATO headquarters on Wednesday, Hegseth began describing the terms under which the U.S. might agree to a force that would help provide Ukraine with the “robust security guarantees to ensure that the war will not begin again.”
“Any security guarantee must be backed by capable European and non-European troops,” Hegseth told almost 50 of Ukraine’s Western backers. If they go to Ukraine, he said, “they should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission.”
Putin has said that he launched the invasion in part due to NATO territory expanding too close to Russia’s borders and is unlikely to accept any operation run by the world’s biggest military organization.
Any European allies taking part would not benefit from NATO’s collective security guarantee if they were attacked, Hegseth said. He underlined that “there will not be U.S. troops deployed to Ukraine.”
He did not reveal what role the U.S. might play.
From Ukraine’s perspective, a Europe-only operation simply would not work. “Any security guarantees are impossible without the Americans,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha warned Thursday.
Source: AP
bd-pratidin/Rafid
