Leaders of several European nations met in Paris today to discuss whether to send troops to help bolster any deal to end the Ukraine war, and if so, what they would do there. A lot of those decisions, however, depend on what kind of support, if any, the U.S. would provide. That’s if an agreement is even reached, which is still an open question.
The French-led effort to ramp up ongoing discussions about committing boots on the ground was spurred by the Trump administration last week cutting Europe out of the negotiations, which are set to begin tomorrow in Saudi Arabia between Washington and Moscow. While not giving European nations a seat at the table, Trump has suggested they could play a peacekeeping role there.
The Washington Post on Monday reported that European nations could contribute upwards of 30,000 troops “who would not be stationed along the contact line but would stand ready as a show of force if Russian forces tried to restart the war,” the publication reported, citing four officials with knowledge of the plans. “The troops could be backstopped by more forces outside Ukraine in case they need to ramp up and move quickly.”
There is ongoing discussion between those nations and the Trump administration on what assets the U.S. would be willing to provide to back up any international force and what Europeans are willing to commit. While decrying Trump’s move to leave them out of the negotiations, the European leaders say much of their planning is contingent on U.S. support. To date, the U.S. has ruled out providing troops, though Trump’s peace envoy Keith Kellogg on Monday suggested that “the policy has always been that you take no options off the table,” Reuters reported. So far there have been few solid promises from European nations for that effort.
France “has done more advanced military planning than others and estimates that it could commit nearly 10,000 troops,” the Post posited. On Sunday, U.K. Prime Minister Kier Starmer broached the possibility of contributing troops to any peacekeeping force in an opinion piece for The Telegraph.
In addition to guaranteeing Ukraine 3 billion pounds per year (about $3.79 billion) in military aid through at least 2030, Starmer wrote that supporting Kyiv “means being ready and willing to contribute to security guarantees to Ukraine by putting our own troops on the ground if necessary.”
“I do not say that lightly. I feel very deeply the responsibility that comes with potentially putting British servicemen and women in harm’s way. But any role in helping to guarantee Ukraine’s security is helping to guarantee the security of our continent, and the security of this country,” he explained without offering any specifics.
Sweden and the Netherlands were more vague about offering to send forces. Sweden said that it would not rule out sending troops to Ukraine if necessary, while the Netherlands is “not negative” about a European peacekeeping force in Ukraine.
Germany, Poland and Spain each dismissed the possibility of sending troops, at least in the near term.
“Unfortunately we are still a long way off” from such a decision, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said, according to the Süddeutsche Zeitung, adding that “it’s quite clear that a very strong Ukrainian army, even in peacetime, must be at the core” of any solution.
Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk offered a similar stance.
Warsaw “does not foresee sending Polish soldiers to Ukraine,” he told reporters before boarding a flight to Paris.
“Nobody is currently considering sending troops to Ukraine,” said José Manuel Albares, Spain’s foreign minister, according to Financial Times. “Peace is still very far away and for one reason only: Vladimir Putin.” Albares added that any discussion of troop deployments or peacekeepers would “have to consider for what mission, who will comprise it, under what flag, with what mandate.”
For his part, Zelensky said foreign boots on Ukrainian soil are not the only option to back up a future peace deal.
“I believe that this is the first platform for the future creation of such a force — the Armed Forces of Europe, such an army that will be able to respond in the sky, on water, on land, with drones in artificial intelligence, as well as in the event of a Russian offensive,” he said, adding that a foreign military presence does not necessarily mean troops stationed on Ukrainian soil but could include air defense systems and weapons to enhance security.
All this depends on a peace deal, which is far from guaranteed. While the exact terms have yet to be announced, Trump administration officials painted some broad outlines last week. As we previously reported, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth cast doubt on Ukraine’s ability to reclaim the land lost since Russia first invaded in 2014. He also said membership in NATO was unlikely. Trump later concurred with both of those stances.
In addition, Hegseth made it clear that while the Trump administration wants European and non-European troops to provide a security guarantee, those troops “should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission, and they should not be covered under Article Five [NATO charter of mutual aid]. There also must be robust international oversight of the line of contact to be clear as part of any security guarantee.”
You can see Hegseth’s comments in the following video.
Zelensky, adamant that his country won’t agree to any deal that does not directly involve Ukraine, has complained that he was not invited to Saudi Arabia even though Trump promised he would be part of any negotiations. Zelensky has also been reluctant to give up all of the roughly 20% of his nation in Russian hands. In Moscow, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that not only will Russia not accept any deal that cedes territory it has gained, but Moscow wants the entirety of four regions it illegally annexed.
All this is posturing ahead of the negotiations. While so many pieces have to fall into place for a peace deal to be realized, this is the closest there has been to an end to the bloodshed, at least temporarily, since Russia launched its full-on invasion nearly three years ago.
Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com