Up to 50,000 troops even without NATO. The FT told what the deployment of foreign troops in Ukraine might look like

The Financial Times wrote about this on Thursday, January 23, emphasizing that the presidency of Donald Trump revives the idea of ​​French President Emmanuel Macron to deploy a Western military contingent in Ukraine as a deterrent against new Russian aggression in the future.

A year ago, this idea was rejected as unfeasible and too risky, writes the FT. However, since then, the Ukrainian army has experienced difficulties, and the prospect of Ukraine’s membership in NATO has diminished. Donald Trump, in turn, has repeatedly stated that he wants to end hostilities as soon as possible. Kyiv, on the other hand, signaled its readiness for an agreement if the allies provide reliable security guarantees.

As the FT writes, when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi talks about the need for 200,000 soldiers, at least, this is an exaggeration.

Ukrainian officials believe that the deployment of 40,000 to 50,000 foreign troops could be a very real possibility, according to people involved in the negotiations between Kyiv and its allies.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte are expected to discuss the issue at an “informal meeting” on February 3.

So far, only the Baltic countries have signaled their support for this idea, if it is more of a mission with the participation of other allies, the journalists write.

When Macron voiced his idea for the introduction of foreign troops into Ukraine, it was that European servicemen could take on a key supporting role. Such as, for example, protection of critical infrastructure, training of the Ukrainian military, patrolling of the border with Belarus.

However, Trump’s re-election has changed the course of the debate, the FT claims.

The main focus is now on how European troops can be used as peacekeepers, as well as help support the Ukrainian Defense Forces.

The mission, writes the FT, would have three goals — to assure Ukraine of the West’s support, to deter Russia from attacking in the future, and to demonstrate to the United States that Europe is committed to guaranteeing Ukraine’s security.

Reflecting on what the deployment of Western forces in Ukraine might look like, former senior NATO official Camille Grand, who is currently a member of the European Council on Foreign Relations, said such a force would need to be powerful enough not to be an easy target that Russia could immediately test. . Also, they should be large enough not to require immediate reinforcements and not be seen as a sideline commitment of NATO.

Grand estimates the force could number 40,000. At the same time, they would probably be formed within the framework of a special coalition led by Great Britain, France and the Netherlands, as well as with the participation of the Baltic and Northern European countries. NATO’s role will be minimized to limit the risk of escalation with Russia.

Grand also suggested that within the so-called ““Berlin Plus” format, the EU can use NATO’s capabilities for strategic planning for peacekeeping operations, as in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

A possible mission would not be a traditional peacekeeping mission, but at the same time would not be involved on the front lines. Western military will be this way “stabilization force” or “a deterrent,” and not completely neutral “peacemaker”.

As an example, FT cites the model of South Korea, where US troops are stationed. Another example is the NATO-led “peacekeeping operation” in Kosovo.

The publication also clarifies that the matter may never come to the introduction of foreign troops into Ukraine, since the idea itself is based on a potential agreement with Russia, which will allow Ukraine to retain its sovereignty and its army, control its territory and remain a democratic country with which the West cooperates .

Russia may never agree to this, the FT warns of a possible scenario. Moscow can also terminate any treaty it signs.

In addition, Europe may refuse to send troops into the hot phase of the war due to the fear of escalation of the conflict with Russia. And even if the leaders of the countries approve such a mission, it can be blocked by the parliaments of the countries or the voters.

However, the FT points out, the risks of sending troops may pale in comparison to the risks of inaction.

On January 21, on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Zelenskyi said that in order to prevent a new Russian attack after a possible ceasefire in Ukraine, it is necessary to deploy at least 200,000 European peacekeepers. This is the minimum number of troops that will provide protection against the Russian army, which has 1.5 million people.

“From all Europeans? 200 thousand is the minimum. This is the minimum, otherwise it is nothing,” Zelenskyy said.

On January 22, Zelenskyi clarified that it is about the number of foreign contingents that Ukraine may have to reduce its army to in the future due to lack of funding, as well as if Ukraine is not a member of NATO.