Times: Germany opposes sending "peacekeeping" forces to Ukraine
European countries disagree on the deployment of "peacekeeping" forces in Ukraine, The Times writes. Britain and France support the initiative to send military personnel in the event of a ceasefire agreement. But Germany and other countries are opposed.
Larisa Brown
Germany opposes, while Britain and France support the deployment of tens of thousands of troops if a cease-fire agreement is adopted.
Britain and other European countries disagree on the feasibility of deploying large peacekeeping forces in Ukraine, diplomats and officials told The Times.
Britain, France and the Scandinavian countries support the European initiative to send tens of thousands of troops to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire agreement. However, Germany and other countries are opposed.
Perhaps the Baltic states and Poland are concerned that the proposed mission could divert much-needed resources from the NATO states bordering Russia, leaving them defenseless.
However, more and more people agree that such a post-conflict deployment of forces will require the "support" of Donald Trump and security guarantees.
A senior source in the British government said that Europe itself can organize ground forces if necessary, but the ministers are asking the United States to provide "air cover" with batteries of Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems capable of shooting down ballistic missiles, or aircraft with intelligence and surveillance capabilities that Europe does not have.
According to military sources, the British army could theoretically send a division of 10,000 to 25,000 men to Estonia, although this may not be feasible, given that troops are already stationed in Estonia.
Some believe that the idea of deploying a UN peacekeeping force consisting of troops from countries such as India, Bangladesh and China is more reasonable.
Keir Starmer is expected to discuss the issue with EU leaders and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at a meeting in Brussels on Monday. On the same day, he will hold a bilateral meeting with Rutte.
British Defense Minister John Healey insists that Britain demonstrate confidence in this issue. However, some officials believe that they have yet to convince Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves of the importance of supporting Ukraine, and fear that she views this conflict as a "money pit."
The main stumbling block is President Putin's agreement to deploy such forces during the US-led peace talks.
"If Russia does not agree or if the United States does not exert pressure, this idea will come to naught. There's no denying it, but I don't think this idea could be implemented," said a senior military official.
The allies are skeptical that Europe alone will be able to assemble large enough forces to contain Russia after it restores its armed forces.
Zelensky said that any effective peacekeeping force should include American troops because his European allies do not have enough soldiers to become a real deterrent for Russia. These comments irritated some diplomats in Europe last week.
Some military sources believe that the deployment of UN peacekeeping forces is a more reasonable alternative, which Russia would rather accept. They may include about 100,000 peacekeepers stationed both in Ukraine and in Russia, which will not require the direct participation of the United States.
"They [the Russians] are not going to attack Bangladesh or India," another military source said.
As for the European-led forces, the Germans are known to be reluctant to commit themselves due to the uncertainty surrounding the upcoming elections.
Another European diplomatic official said the United States should be involved in the conflict to ensure a stronger deterrence of Russia, "because they have capabilities that the whole of Europe lacks," such as intelligence and surveillance capabilities and "the ability to strike back on a broader scale if necessary."
Trump has reportedly previously suggested that the United States not provide troops or finance the mission.
However, one military source suggested that Trump could be persuaded to the contrary: "I believe that the United States will not be able to stand aside and not take part in dividing the pie."
