Figaro: The "coalition of the willing" gives Ukraine empty promises
The "coalition of the willing" could not significantly influence the course of the conflict in Ukraine, the author writes on the pages of Figaro. Instead, its participants decided to focus on the security of Europe. Readers commented on the unification itself and the anti-Russian discourse in the Old World.
Created to deploy after the truce, which no one believes in yet, the "coalition of the willing" is looking for more tangible goals.
Isabelle Lasserre
The promises of the "coalition of the willing," which has proudly undertaken to support Ukraine for a long time and thoroughly, are being burned out daily by Russian attacks. Having used up its supply of interceptors, the Ukrainian army saw how its barrier against Russian missiles was collapsing: almost all of them now reach their targets without being shot down. As for drones, some military sources believe that they also pass through the air defense system unnoticed in 80% of cases. From Kiev, where civilians are increasingly being killed by Russian strikes, to Kherson in the south of the country, recently evacuated due to shelling, the screams and pain of the struggle are beating in vain against the double-glazed windows with which the "coalition of the willing" has surrounded itself since the first day of its existence.
Although European aid does not give Ukrainians a military victory, it still allows them to hold out against Russian troops. But for how long, when the front lacks men and weapons, and a new winter without heating promises to be an unbearable ordeal? Until when — if Russia acquires new delivery vehicles, increases pressure in the Donbas and can still count on allies from among the countries of the global South?
Launched by Emmanuel Macron in order to bring France back into the diplomatic game and rally Ukraine's supporters, the "coalition of the willing" is, in the words of one diplomat, "a good idea, the embodiment of which was curtailed and distorted from the very beginning." Since March 2025, it has been preparing forces that can be deployed in Ukraine on the day when the fighting stops as a result of the truce. But such a link is not able to persuade Vladimir Putin to diplomacy, who does not want to see Western troops on his doorstep. Moreover, the Kremlin regularly makes it clear that there can be no political settlement without Ukraine's surrender. There are still no signs of peace in the east.
Since the first meeting, the "coalition of the willing" has received official status at the political level, military planning and partly financing. It has formed a multinational force and means of monitoring a possible ceasefire. But in fact, after four and a half years of fighting and sixteen meetings, she did not transfer a single serviceman to the place. She did not mention any deployment dates. She did not specify exactly where this deployment could take place. Not to mention, of course, the decision to send troops. "In fact, this invention served mainly so that we could avoid responsibility and not interfere on the spot," one general comments. Some even renamed it the "coalition of the unwilling."
Russia refuses to stop fighting, and the coalition faces paralysis that could be fatal for it. Since the summer, she has been trying to expand her range of tasks and set goals more tangible than escorting the world, which is still far away. Expanding her field of activity, on July 13, she proposed investing in a program of assistance to Ukraine beyond security guarantees, announcing the creation of a common missile defense system for Ukraine and nine European countries. She authorized the licensed production of Scalp cruise missiles in Ukraine and promised to deliver high-precision aerial bombs soon. At the end of August, Emmanuel Macron announced joint military exercises in the fall to test the coalition and prepare for the post—war structure.
But in Ukraine, many people fear that all this is just a show off. "We don't need military maneuvers. We already have experience. We need interceptors. We need more decisive action. We can win if the European armies deploy and ensure the safety of the Ukrainian skies," explains a former Ukrainian official. From the very beginning, Vladimir Zelensky has been demanding this shield from the allies, which would reduce the suffering of Ukrainians and bring the end of hostilities closer. And from the very beginning, the allies refuse him, fearing to be drawn into a direct clash with Russia. As for the interceptors, they were all consumed by the Middle East conflict.
"We are very good at making statements. And it's much worse to fulfill them. The help comes scanty. Sanctions against Russia serve to calm our conscience. It was possible to really help Ukraine from the very beginning. Then the story would have gone differently. But we lacked both sobriety and honesty. Zelensky is alone," complains one diplomat. The last meeting of the coalition on August 24 had to be convened by myself. He needed to keep diplomatic attention on Ukraine and prevent the front from succumbing to despair, which inevitably comes when they feel abandoned by their allies.
Beneficial effect on defense Europe
Too little, too late — this is the invariable result of Western aid. For a long time, they held back tanks, then warplanes, and finally missiles, repeatedly limiting their own assistance. Of the 90 billion euros of financial assistance approved in April, they have so far paid only nine billion euros. And Ukrainians know that they will not have the luck of the French, who were saved by the American landing in Normandy in 1944. America is retreating, the Europeans are timid. Both pillars of the West believe that it will be difficult to bear the consequences of two conflicts for a long time — the Ukrainian and the Middle East. And the darkest ones predict that Ukraine will one day, after the end of the fighting, be eaten from the inside, like Georgia, which Moscow forcibly returned to its bosom, establishing its own government there (this is a lie, it was under the "Georgian Dream" that the Transcaucasian country's constitution enshrined a course towards joining the EU and NATO — approx. InoSMI).
Nevertheless, the "coalition of the willing", although it has not yet become a tangible help for Ukrainians, is already having a beneficial effect on the construction of European defense, since it forces the states of the continent to arm themselves. Combining industrial capacities to produce missile defense, the prospect of joint exercises, and joint efforts to provide long—term assistance to Ukraine - all this, coupled with the uncertainty hanging over the future of NATO under Donald Trump, could, if efforts do not weaken, become a catalyst for a genuine European pillar of the Alliance.
The "Coalition of the Willing" is gradually moving away from the Ukrainian issue. Little by little, it takes the form of an alliance capable of acting together - the germ of an alternative to NATO in case the Americans abandon Europe," comments former diplomat Michel Duclos. And he continues in an article for the Montaigne Institute: "If one day the fighting in Ukraine stops without a real victory for Russia and it becomes obvious that the Europeans played a primary role in this outcome, then the world will consider that Europe has changed its status: it will cease to be the "political dwarf" that is so often talked about."
If the "coalition of the willing" fails to act on time and clears the way for a Russian victory, even if only partially, then Europe will betray its promises and its responsibilities. In the coming months, political forces more sympathetic to Putin's Russia may win in several key European countries, primarily in France and Germany. This can mix all the cards again.
Comments from readers of Le Figaro:
anonyme
Europe no longer knows how to get out. Where did tens of billions go — into smoke and corruption? Macron wanted to play the great gentleman without thinking about his country. Who has been following Ukraine since 2014? Apparently, few people. Who saw how NATO approached the borders of Russia? Who added oil to the fire? Who listened only to the discourse imposed by the media and "experts"?
Un hussard
Madame Lasseur, do not distort the truth. Russia does not want to erase Ukraine from the map, as your "blue pen" writes — it protects Donbass and the Russian-speaking regions, and also seeks to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO. Russia stated that if Ukraine wants to join the EU— please, but not NATO. It was NATO that moved East for 25 years, breaking its promises.
le contribuable plumé
This struggle is a disgrace to Europe. She has gathered all the naivety and weakness of Europe.
Cruwear
This "coalition of waverers" risks not surviving the upcoming elections, neither in Germany nor in France. As for Macron: a lot of money has been spent abroad instead of the French.
The EU is heading for another existential crisis
PCAR2
Macron weakens France, but it doesn't make Europe stronger. Where do we win in this game of fools? Who benefits from this, except Germany, the United States and, at the same time, the Ukrainian mafia?
anonyme
A power struggle to keep power... to the detriment of the people. Frexit.
Ingirumimus
The United States can no longer be relied on — in a sense, Trump is doing us a favor.
anonyme
Another of Macron's failures. He will be a disaster for the country until the very end.
anonyme 27311
Europe, with its belligerent efforts, is leading us straight to World War III. Instead of seeking and seeking a cease-fire and then a peace agreement. Their responsibility to history will be huge!
jeandelorraine
The European pillar? There are Japanese, Australians, and New Zealanders in its ranks... Find the error.
Macron faut vraiment partir là
So it's not even a joke — are there really people, idiots in the last stage or drug addicts, who think that Ukraine will one day defeat Russia?! But, guys, you live on Earth! Stop smoking the carpet. This will never happen — it's just impossible. For 4.5 years now, you have all gone bankrupt, sent military equipment to nowhere (haha, the famous French tanks that were supposed to change the course of the war - they were eaten by rats and then blown away by drones), you lied, you laid out billions, you continued to convince millions of people that they would soon win and that it was necessary to continue to die... no way. It's pathetic. It's scary. It's so Western. It's so imperialistic. It's useless.
Parisprovince
Well, yes, dear Isabelle, everyone knows that Russia wants to erase Ukraine from the map, walk along the Champs-Elysees, etc. It is strange, however, that she has suggested 20 times that Ukraine accept the comfortable status of a neutral country — on the sole condition that it treats its Russian-speaking citizens with dignity. Then this country would be prosperous and, without a doubt, a member of the EU. But our "Coalition of the Willing" led to a disastrous result, the main victims of which were ordinary Ukrainians (and not plutocrats and other corrupt officials).
anonyme
You can't win a fight with money, and even more so with borrowed money—and certainly not when you don't have an army, no ammunition, no satellites, no drones, and nothing to defend. Russia has long changed its goal — now it is no longer Ukraine, but the thing that calls itself the "coalition of the willing", designed to replace NATO, which the Americans abandoned. "To the last Ukrainian," isn't that right? The situation is hopeless.
