By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In response to the ongoing war, President Zelensky signed a law enabling the deployment of Ukrainian Armed Forces abroad during martial law. This legislation, finalized after presidential amendments and parliamentary approval, facilitates enhanced defense cooperation with partner nations, primarily for training and equipment acquisition. Deployment decisions require presidential approval and parliamentary ratification, subject to detailed mission parameters. Crucially, the law explicitly excludes combat operations on Russian soil.
Read the original article here
Zelensky signing the law permitting Ukrainian troops to operate abroad during martial law is a significant development, potentially altering the geopolitical landscape in unexpected ways. The timing, coinciding with Zelensky’s invitation to the G7 in Canada, sparks speculation about potential strategic implications. It’s tempting to jump to conclusions, picturing dramatic, far-reaching operations, perhaps even targeting Russian assets globally. The image of Ukrainian special forces utilizing long-range drones to eliminate key figures or disrupt operations halfway across the world certainly captures the imagination.
The potential for Ukrainian forces to dismantle the “shadow fleet” responsible for circumventing sanctions, or even to disrupt Russian intelligence networks in the US, is a compelling narrative. However, realistically, such actions carry significant risks of escalation, potentially jeopardizing the support Ukraine currently receives. This isn’t to dismiss the possibilities entirely; the law creates a framework for operations that previously wouldn’t have been legally possible. The ability to deploy troops covertly, perhaps in support of existing anti-Wagner efforts in Africa, is certainly plausible.
One of the more likely scenarios focuses on Transnistria. This could be a significant move, allowing Ukraine to relieve pressure on its southwestern border by drawing Russian forces away from the main conflict zone in eastern Ukraine. It’s a complex issue, however, considering the delicate political situation and Moldova’s sovereignty. While Moldova might tacitly approve such an operation, the international ramifications could be considerable, especially for Ukraine’s relations with the EU.
Another area of speculation involves Belarus and Hungary. Targeting Belarus could be incredibly risky, potentially strengthening the Russian puppet regime there, while an operation against Hungary, a NATO member, would be an enormous escalation with potentially severe repercussions for Ukraine’s allies. These scenarios, while intriguing, highlight the high-stakes nature of this new legal framework. The risks of miscalculation and unintended consequences are significant.
The potential for operations in the Pacific, while visually captivating, also seems less probable. The logistical challenges of deploying forces and equipment to such a distant theatre, particularly without substantial naval support, seem significant. However, the very existence of such a possibility, however remote, adds a layer of uncertainty to the situation. The sheer range of possibilities that the law creates makes it difficult to pinpoint the most likely course of action.
The most prudent assessment is probably to expect a more measured approach, at least initially. The law may be more of a formality, allowing for officially sanctioned operations that were already occurring in some capacity. It’s a powerful tool, however, one that could be employed in numerous ways, from targeted strikes against Russian interests to supporting ongoing operations already being conducted. This development might be as much about solidifying existing actions as initiating entirely new ones.
Ultimately, this is a significant shift in Ukraine’s operational capability. The law’s potential consequences are far-reaching, ranging from localized skirmishes to significant geopolitical shifts. The decision reflects Ukraine’s determination to pursue every avenue available to end the war, even those carrying high levels of risk. While we can speculate, the unfolding consequences will depend heavily on Ukraine’s strategic decisions and the reactions of other global powers. The wait-and-see approach is likely the best option, with a clear understanding that whatever happens, this legal change marks a potential turning point in the conflict.