As the US threatens to reduce or cut its support to Kyiv while also declaring that Ukraine will not be allowed to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), Europeans are
The , a non-EU defense power in the alliance, has said it is willing to send troops to Ukraine to deter Russia in the longer run.
British Prime Minister wrote in an op-ed in the British daily The Telegraph that the UK was “ready to play a leading role” in Ukraine’s defense and security.
“The end of , when it comes, cannot merely become a temporary pause before [Russian President attacks again,” added Starmer.
The idea of deploying European troops on the ground in Ukraine was first proffered by France’s President last year. Experts say it is finally beginning to gain traction, even though the feasibility of such a project remains uncertain.
.
Who might send troops for the ‘peacekeeping force’?
Several European leaders have indicated that the presence of European troops on the ground in Ukraine will become possible only when a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine has been agreed upon. And experts concur.
“It’s early days. There can be no such force without a sustainable deal,” Lawrence Freedman, an eminent military historian and strategist, told DW. “And it shouldn’t be called a peacekeeping force, which is supposedly impartial. This is a deterrent force, a reassurance force, designed to deter Russia,” or punish it if it violates the agreement, he said.
France and Britain have backed the idea, and Sweden, too, has expressed willingness to send troops once peace has been established.
Experts said a coalition of willing European nations could be formed to send troops to Ukraine, but outside the umbrella.
However, key European nations remain ambivalent. German Chancellor was noncommittal ahead of national elections later this week — even though his party’s main competitor, the conservative Christian Democrats, indicated they would be open to the idea.
has been among the strongest backers of Ukraine yet says it will not deploy Polish soldiers as part of any multinational arrangement.
“We do not plan to send Polish soldiers to the territory of Ukraine,” Poland’s Prime Minister told reporters. “We will give logistical and political support to the countries that will possibly want to provide such guarantees in the future.”
How many troops are needed?
Even if there is political will, a key question is whether the allies will have the capacity to spare soldiers to guard Ukraine’s borders.
“The dilemma the Europeans face is: Where do they get those troops from? Pulling [them] from the border with Russia makes them vulnerable,” Rafael Loss, an expert on security affairs and a fellow with the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), told DW.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the former NATO secretary-general, told British broadcaster BBC that Europe would need to muster 50,000 to 100,000 troops.
However, so far, no countries among those that have indicated their willingness to be a part of such a plan have given any idea of the number of troops they are willing to send.
According to Freedman, the UK could offer a maximum of up to 10,000 soldiers.
“For every soldier, you need one in training and another recuperating, so my rough assessment is that overall you need at least 100,000 troops,” said Freedman. “A smaller force can get overrun; then you have a bigger crisis. You need numbers that Russia takes seriously.”
But putting together tens of thousands of soldiers to send into a potential conflict zone is a controversial political task. “Boots on the ground face a threat. Countries that will deploy them also face threats, especially hybrid threats or even assassinations,” added Loss. “Putin will test the deal.”
Moreover, EU countries lack adequate manpower to realize NATO’s own defense plans for guarding member states in the event of a Russian attack. Germany, for instance, has been mulling over whether it should reintroduce a mandatory military service, or draft, to recruit more soldiers.
“By summer, NATO will communicate capability targets to the individual governments. [German news magazine] Spiegel reported in June that Germany will likely need ‘upward of 272,000 troops’ to implement the plans,” added Loss. “The Bundeswehr’s current size is 181,000, with a pre-2022 goal to grow to 203,000 [by] 2031,” he said.
A research paper by the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) noted that even if NATO allies wanted to commit forces to Ukraine, “they would face the problem that they have locked the majority of their forces into NATO’s defense planning.”
Why does such a force need the US more than the UN?
Technically, experts said, the Europeans do not need the UN’s stamp of approval to deploy such a force. In fact, seeking the approval might further complicate matters, as any resolution would be vetoed by Russia and China and be dead on arrival.
But the US is desperately needed, even if indirectly, to make such a deterrent force effective and worth the risk.
On a trip to Europe last week, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that NATO would not be involved in any such deterrence force, but he left the door open to Europeans.
Both Freedman and Loss indicated that there might still be some room for indirect US assistance, such as logistical support and air cover.
US support is needed to “ferry people back and forth and keep them supplied,” added Freedman, for example, using big transport helicopters. The US could also offer critical intelligence through superior satellite reconnaissance, he said.
Europeans are dependent on the US for a “wider set of enablers,” he said, “that they don’t have in sufficient numbers.”
Keith Kellogg, Trump’s Ukraine envoy, has asked Europeans to give a precise number of troops and assets they will deploy to such a peacekeeping mission. He met with the EU Commission President on Tuesday in Brussels.
Most people in Europe would also seem to see US involvement as crucial.
“For example, a recent poll in Germany revealed that a staggering 59% of the public would support a deployment of the Bundeswehr, together with other European troops, to uphold a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia,” German think tank SWP said, but not without a US backup.
“Almost all European states reject such a mission without US participation as too risky. However, they could imagine participating if the US decided to do so. A British-French leadership role is not enough for most Europeans,” it said.
Will Turkish troops make the force more acceptable to Russia?
But Russia also needs to come around the idea as a part of the overall peace deal. One suggestion is to include Turkish troops among the peacekeepers. has played a balancing act throughout Russia’s Ukraine invasion and remained sympathetic to Russia whilst being a NATO member.
“Do you involve the Turks? Turkey is a NATO country, and maybe they could provide the numbers. Russians may find that tolerable,” Freedman said.
Edited by: Timothy Jones
The post Mooted EU deployment in Ukraine is fraught with challenges appeared first on Deutsche Welle.
