Military sources from more than 30 countries convened in the UK this week are planning to break the scope and size of the ceasefire mission to Ukraine, military sources told Al Jazeera.
The meeting comes two weeks after British Prime Minister Kiel Starmer announced that the “Wishing Coalition” would work on a peace plan to present the support of the war-torn country in Washington to doubtful President Donald Trump.
“They look very serious… what can be contributed in a country they need,” said a senior military source with knowledge of the debate.
“It needs to be the biggest approach, so we can see if the US can provide enablers,” the source said. “This is an opportunity for Europeans to step up. It’s very exciting… we can still do this very quickly.”
Enablers include air, land and sea transport, long-range fires, drones, counterdrons and air missile defense.
Ukrainian peacekeeping implementation forces told Al Jazeera that they would need a number of “tens of thousands” troops by sitting between Ukrainian permanent forces, between the troops of about a million and Russian invasion forces, and between the Russian invasion forces, which are believed to be supported by a Moscow history government.
Moreover, the US could only be there in supportive capacity.
Trump told reporters last month that he hopes Europe will lead the way in securing Ukraine.
“I’m not too over the security guarantee,” he said on Feb. 26.
That troublesome burden appears to go far beyond the requirements of the so-called “ceasefire toolkit,” which was secretly drafted by military experts in the US, Russia and Ukraine and released this month.
5,000 police and 10,000 supporters suggested that it would be sufficient to monitor a 5-km (3-mile) wide buffer zone along the entire front line. However, this was based on Russia agreeing to pull back heavy military equipment, the creation of humanitarian corridors, and joint military coordination.
The majority of volunteer forces come from the European Union, but non-EU countries such as Norway and Türkiye, as well as Asia-Pacific countries, have also expressed interest.
“If peace cannot be achieved in Europe, elsewhere in the world can have meaning and may have an impact on the Pacific,” military sources said, explaining the interests of non-Europeans.
One idea seems to be agreed. That means a ceasefire must come first.
“We can’t see the situation in which European countries place their troops in Ukraine, but the war is still ongoing,” the source said.
European casualties could trigger a mutual defense clause in NATO Article 5 without Russia attacking NATO members, sources said. “Article 5 is sacred. It’s one thing Putin respects. It’s one thing that discourages him from attacking the NATO country. It needs to be protected.”
What does power do?
General Ben Hodges, a former commander of the US military in Europe, said, “In peacekeeping, you are thinking of a blue helmet, a UN mission… the Russians will never respect you and will never have prayers for success in this case,” adding that the military “needs to have the ability to be true deterrent.”
Apart from armor, firepower and enablers, the Force must have “authority to use them,” Hodges told Al Jazeera.
“If a Russian drone is flying overhead, they need to shoot it off immediately and don’t need to call Brussels or the capital to ask for permission,” he said. “Of course, the Russians will test all of this in the first few hours.”
Contributors have not yet agreed on this authority. “I don’t think there’s a consensus yet,” the military source said.
Russia has made it clear that it is hostile to the idea of Ukrainian multinational forces.
In an interview last month, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called the initiative a “bold stance” and amounted to “continuing the creation of the Kiev regime in war with us.”
The positioning of the troops is also an important decision.
“If it’s a force intended to be in the separation zone between the Russians and the Ukrainians, that could be a significant number,” Hodges said.
Another possibility is to set up rebellious forces stationed behind Ukrainians. “If Russia does anything, these guys will be deployed positively to deal with it,” Hodges said.
This is safer for the military, he said, but “it’s probably not effective at first, as it tests how long it takes for the Russians to react.”
Can Europe do that?
The UK and France are leading efforts to unite this multinational force.
They were old hands on this, leading to the formation of a union that had won two world wars.
Their recent history was patchy.
France’s last major foreign business and Sahel to drive armed groups out of Mali failed. The last time the UK mobilized was due to the Second Gulf War in 2003 and Afghanistan in 2009.
Today their standing forces are 140,000 (UK) and 202,000 (France) according to military balances issued by the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.
French President Emmanuel Macron first raised the possibility of French forces in Ukraine last February, but the EU quickly spun it into peacekeeping forces, rather than fighting forces alongside Ukraine.
The priority was announced that the UK would be willing to send troops to Ukraine as part of its peacekeeping forces ahead of the Paris Summit on February 17th.
The strings of European wallets were loosened earlier this month when European leaders agreed that defence spending would continue to increase from the book. This could generate 800 billion euros ($874 billion) in new defence investments, said EU chief Ursula Von Der Leyen.
Others were less sure whether Europe would act.
“When I see these European officials throwing numbers, they’re going to invest in this, they’re going to do this and this, and this is all hollow… they’re not being delivered today.”
During the three-year full-scale war in Ukraine, European defence budgets only increased by 30% on average, Council of Europe President Antonio Costa told the European Parliament recently.
More than money, Grimes believes, the fear of death has been hampering European defence autonomy for decades.
“We saw it in the Balkans and Afghanistan, and it was all a support level activity that was in the wire,” he noted basic camping activities. “That’s very different from being on the frontline.”
The latest example was when the UK escaped its plan to police a floating pier in Gaza and protected its humanitarian supply operations last summer, he said.
Such a creak “connects to several small units to symbolically enter to show that they are there.”
“I don’t think that traditional troops have been brought in, supplied or supported for at least six months,” he said.
Source link
