Ukraine War: Europeans at Ukraine crisis folk disaster about peacekeeping

Great Britain and France are progressing, Germany slows down: At the Paris Summit for the Ukraine War, the Europeans have shown themselves to be in the question of a peace force to secure a possible ceasefire. Chancellor Olaf Scholz described the discussions after the meeting as irritating and completely premature and criticized that the heads of the Ukrainians were talking about possible results of peace talks that had not yet taken place.

“This is extremely inappropriate to say it very openly and honestly,” said Scholz. It is an “inappropriate debate on the wrong time and on the wrong topic”. Following the informal consultations, Scholz said to which France’s President Emmanuel Macron had also invited the heads of state and government from Great Britain, Italy, Poland, Spain, the Netherlands and Denmark as well as the top of EU and NATO.

Scholz thus opposes British Prime Minister Keir Strander and Macron. The Strander was pre -strewn shortly before the meeting and showed himself “ready and willing” to send soldiers to the country attacked by Russia if necessary. In a guest post for the “Telegraph”, he wrote that Great Britain could take on a “leading role” when working on security guarantees for Ukraine. France is also said to have expressed the willingness to send troops a long time ago.

France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot reported on very concrete conversations “at various levels” about the sending of soldiers from several countries. Such a peacekeeper could guarantee a future ceasefire and a “permanent peace” in Ukraine, he said in an interview by the broadcaster LCI.

Crisis summit based on US demands

The top topic at the summit was the question of how Europe should react to the drastic change of course in US Ukraine policy. This aims to force Ukrainian President Wolodymyr Selenskyj and Kremlin boss Vladimir Putin in negotiations on the end of the war and to transfer responsibility for the protection of a peace deal.

In addition, in Berlin and other European capitals, the request to report possible contributions to security guarantees for Ukraine recently received the request. According to information from the German Press Agency, the countries should state, among other things, whether they could send soldiers for a peacekeeping or training programs to Ukraine after an end to the Russian attack war. In addition, it should also be about weapon systems and the question of what is expected from the USA.

Strander used a pessimistic forecast after the conversations for an appeal. Europe has to play its role, he said. “But there has to be US protection, because only a US security guarantee can effectively prevent Russia from further attack on Ukraine.”

No central role in the negotiation process for Europeans

Europeans also have to decide how they want to deal with the fact that the Americans do not see a central role in the negotiating process for them – and that Ukraine are unintentional to demand concessions. In order to achieve an end to the Russian war of aggression, Ukraine should give up its ambitions to quick NATO from a US perspective and accept that part of its state remains permanently under Russian control.

EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Council President António Costa said after the meeting on the platform X that the Europeans agree that Ukraine deserves peace that respect the independence and territorial integrity of the country and offer strong security guarantees. Hungary – even EU member – assumed completely different intentions to the summit participants: In Paris, “war supporters, anti -trump and frustrated European politicians” were raised to prevent a peace agreement with Ukraine, said Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto.

Disagreement in the event of a possible peace force clearly

The United States has already made it clear that they do not want to send soldiers to Ukraine to secure an armistice. Host Macron had called US President Donald Trump shortly before the meeting. He wants to start negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin as soon as possible about an end to the Russian war of aggression. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Rankhoehhe representatives of Russia want to talk about it this week in Saudi Arabia-without the participation of Ukraine or other European representatives.

The Netherlands and Sweden recently showed themselves openly for the posting of troops to Ukraine. Spain and Denmark ultimately no longer excluded such a step categorically. Unlike depicted by the French Foreign Minister, Poland is not planning to send soldiers. “The meeting has not changed anything at our point of view,” said Prime Minister Donald Tusk. Previously, he had emphasized that Poland had not intended to send troops to Ukraine. However, countries that want to give such guarantees in the future will support them logistically and politically.

How many European soldiers could be sent to Ukraine after a possible peace agreement is unclear. As the German press agency learned from negotiation circles, a five-digit number is discussed. Accordingly, a troop strength of 200,000 soldiers brought into play by Ukrainian President Wolodymyr Selenskyj is unrealistic. At the beginning of the debate in December, over 40,000 soldiers had been speculated.

According to diplomats, the main focus is currently on whether and if so, how many European soldiers could be stationed for the training of Ukrainian armed forces in the western part of the country. It is therefore also extremely unlikely that they are sent directly to the front line in order to monitor compliance with a possible peace agreement.

Scholz has been on the brake since the beginning of the debate about a peace force. His argument: First of all, there must be a negotiation result with the participation of the Ukrainians, only then could it be about securing a ceasefire. “Trump to promote something for a deal that we don’t even know would be negligent,” says German governmental circles.

There is also a red line for the sending of troops for the Chancellor: Without the participation of US troops, this is out of the question for him because in his view it would split NATO: “We will not participate in scenarios in this context In which European and American security are deployed, for example, European soldiers are used without full US investment, “he argues.