By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In response to potential reduced US security support for Europe and the exclusion of Ukraine from initial US-Russia peace talks, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer proposed deploying British troops to Ukraine as part of a potential 100,000-strong European peacekeeping force. This deployment, discussed at an upcoming Paris meeting, aims to guarantee Ukraine’s security and prevent future Russian aggression. Starmer stressed the importance of including Ukraine in all peace negotiations and highlighted the potential for a 25,000-30,000-troop European deterrent force, potentially supported by US intelligence and air power. The proposal underscores growing European concerns about reliance on the US for security.
Read the original article here
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s openness to deploying British troops to Ukraine, even amidst growing uncertainty regarding continued US support, presents a complex and potentially pivotal moment in the ongoing conflict. The suggestion, however, is not for direct intervention in the active warzone, but rather as part of a potential peacekeeping force following a negotiated peace agreement. This distinction is crucial, highlighting a shift from active combat support to post-conflict stabilization.
The potential deployment stems from a growing concern about the future of the conflict, particularly regarding the influence of potential changes in US leadership and policy. A shift towards less US involvement could significantly alter the strategic landscape, leaving European nations to shoulder a greater burden. This perceived vulnerability underscores the urgency of exploring alternative approaches to securing a lasting peace, even if that involves a significant commitment of British resources.
The idea of British peacekeeping troops in Ukraine, following a peace deal, raises several important questions. The success of such a mission would hinge on the existence of a genuine peace to maintain. Peacekeeping troops would require the authority and capability to act decisively against violations of the peace agreement, potentially confronting Russian forces directly. Maintaining impartiality would also be critical, which could prove extremely challenging given the deeply entrenched animosities and ongoing distrust between the parties.
The proposed deployment is not without its detractors. Concerns about the readiness and capacity of the British armed forces, especially given their current state and past conflicts, are valid. Additionally, the practical challenges of deploying and sustaining such a force in a potentially volatile environment, while remaining neutral, are enormous. The limited commitment to deploy to only Western Ukraine further raises doubts about the effectiveness of such a force in a post-conflict landscape still subject to Russian aggression.
A significant aspect of the discussion centers on the relative contributions of different nations to the Ukrainian war effort. While the US has provided substantial financial and military aid, questions are raised regarding the proportion of aid provided by European nations, and specifically, the UK’s role within this context. The debate often devolves into comparisons of financial contributions and military equipment, leading to accusations of insufficient aid from European nations relative to the US commitment.
Despite the complexities and challenges, the proposal for a British peacekeeping presence reflects a growing sense of responsibility among European nations. The willingness to consider such a significant commitment underscores a recognition of the need for decisive action to secure a lasting peace and prevent further instability in the region. The UK’s willingness to step up could pressure other European nations to similarly increase their commitment, fostering a more unified and assertive European response. The lack of decisive action from other European powers is raising concerns about their resolve and is being criticized as insufficient to the task.
Ultimately, the feasibility and effectiveness of this proposal remain highly uncertain. However, the very fact that it’s being discussed openly suggests a notable shift in the strategic calculus surrounding the conflict. The evolving geopolitical landscape, coupled with concerns about the impact of potential changes in US policy, has prompted this exploration of alternative approaches to securing a peaceful resolution in Ukraine. The success of such a mission hinges upon the ability of all parties to engage in good faith negotiations and commitment to a lasting peace. Even then, the challenges for any peacekeeping force in Ukraine will be immense, and the outcome far from certain.