European countries have intensified talks on sending peacekeepers to Ukraine to monitor and enforce a possible ceasefire.
But the potential deployment of European peacekeepers to Ukraine faces a lot of challenges and uncertainties. There is no unity among European countries on the issue, with some of them openly opposing the idea.
The number of peacekeepers is also uncertain, and it is not clear if it will be enough to ensure the effective enforcement of a ceasefire. And the rules of engagement may become a major stumbling block.
Another concern is that the Kremlin has refused to accept the potential deployment of Western peacekeepers in Ukraine. Without Russia's approval, the idea is unlikely to be implemented, and there are no indications so far that U.S. President Donald Trump will pressure Russian President Vladimir Putin to approve a European peacekeeping mission.
European countries have also said peacekeepers would need to have some form of U.S. support.
However, it is unclear if Washington will provide it. Trump has aligned his policy closely with the Kremlin's agenda and has so far refused to offer any security guarantees to Ukraine.
"The deployment of a European military force to Ukraine is, in my view, the least likely form of security assistance to Ukraine because of the high risks involved, and notably the requirement that the United States provides security guarantees to the force — essentially Washington being ready to fight Russia," Neil Melvin, director of international security studies at the Royal United Services Institute, told the Kyiv Independent.
"President Trump and representatives of his administration have repeatedly stated that the US will not provide such commitments."
Jenny Mathers, a lecturer in international politics at the U.K.'s Aberystwyth University, also argued that "Trump and (U.S. Vice President JD) Vance made it clear just how little they are interested in the security of Ukraine or indeed of Europe."
"European leaders — and probably societies too — are accepting that Europe will need to take the lead when it comes to security guarantees."
Dominic Culverwell
No unity in Europe
Talks on the potential peacekeeping mission have been spearheaded by the U.K. and France.
Ireland, Lithuania, and Canada have also stated that they are considering sending their peacekeepers to Ukraine.
"The force would be led by the U.K. and France but would be most likely supported by Sweden, possibly also Poland and the Baltic states or Spain, Italy or the Netherlands, and Denmark," Pavel Havlicek, a research fellow at the Association for International Affairs, told the Kyiv Independent.
But several countries, including some of those named by Havlicek, have been opposed to the idea or non-committal.
Germany has taken an ambivalent stance.
German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said in January that Berlin might consider deploying its troops in a peacekeeping mission to monitor a potential ceasefire in Ukraine.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz from the Social Democratic Party contradicted Pistorius in February, saying that discussions over Germany potentially deploying its peacekeeping troops to Ukraine were "premature and inappropriate."
The CDU/CSU alliance, which won Germany's Feb. 23 parliamentary election, appears to be more open to the idea. Its leader, Friedrich Merz, who is expected to become the next chancellor, said in December that Germany may consider joining a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine but only with Russia's consent.
"For my country, Germany, it is a test on our reliability in a possible new European security architecture," Rebecca Harms, a former member of the European Parliament from Germany, told the Kyiv Independent.
"And if we put its participation in a historical context, I see that for the Germans, it would be the chance to pay off our horrendous historical guilt in Ukraine," she added in reference to Nazi Germany's occupation of Ukraine during World War II and the Holocaust.
Meanwhile, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said in December that Warsaw was not planning to deploy peacekeepers to Ukraine.
"(Some countries) are hesitant — like Italy, Spain, and Germany — as they see that this could be a potentially dangerous mission, especially if the United States continues to refuse to provide a backstop," James Shea, a defense and security expert at Chatham House, told the Kyiv Independent.
"Others like the Baltic states and Poland are worried that the troops going to Ukraine would come from the NATO battalions currently defending their national territory and leaving them more vulnerable to Russia."
Kollen Post
The role of Non-European troops
If a peacekeeping force is created, it might include troops from non-EU countries as well.
Turkey has indicated its openness to deploying troops in Ukraine as part of a potential peacekeeping force, Bloomberg reported on Feb. 27, citing sources familiar with the matter.
"The Europeans need to work hard with the Americans to ensure that they resist Putin's demands and go for a robust European-led force."
Shea said that "Russia will probably advocate this option (of non-European troops) as it would like the force to be 'neutral' and similar to a lightly armed UN peacekeeping force, observing the ceasefire rather than with a mandate to enforce it and help Ukraine to defend itself."
"The Europeans need to work hard with the Americans to ensure that they resist Putin's demands and go for a robust European-led force," he added.
Havlicek said that "from the Western point of view, Turkish soldiers would be preferred, and Chinese or Central Asian ones would be (preferred) from the Russian one."
Kateryna Denisova
What are the numbers?
At least 200,000 peacekeepers would be required on Ukraine's eastern front for a peace deal to be enforced, President Volodymyr Zelensky said at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland in January.
Later, he clarified his comments.
"By the way, I didn't say we need 200,000 (peacekeepers)... A journalist asked me, I said, 'Maybe more, maybe less,'" Zelensky said.
The Washington Post reported in February, citing its sources, that participating European nations could send between 25,000 and 30,000 soldiers to Ukraine.
"President Zelensky has spoken of the need for a force of hundreds of thousands," Melvin said. "This is unrealistic. It might just be possible to put together a force of up to 30,000 – although whether that could be sustained for long is unclear."
Havlicek said that "around 30,000 to 50,000 troops are often discussed, and they would not be placed at the front line but in several key points where it would be possible to step in if necessary."
It is unclear if such a number will be enough. Harms argued that, given the length of the front line, 100,000 would be needed to effectively monitor the ceasefire.
Chris York
What is Russia's stance?
Another problem is that the Kremlin has opposed the potential deployment of Western peacekeepers to Ukraine.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned in February that Moscow would not accept the deployment of NATO military personnel in Ukraine after any potential peace deal.
Melvin said that "this is likely to be a major roadblock to a peace agreement."
But analysts say that the West may try to change the Kremlin's position.
Havlicek argued that "the Kremlin refuses the Western/NATO countries' deployment right now" but "we are only at the beginning of the negotiation process, with many unknowns."
"Economic pressure, including on the energy (sector), could serve as a means to pressure Putin into negotiations," he added.
A European diplomatic source told the Kyiv Independent that, to force Putin to accept a European peacekeeping force, the West should threaten to impose more painful sanctions on Russia's banking system. The source also said that the West could threaten Russia with sanctions as punishment for violating a ceasefire agreement.
The big question is whether Trump will be capable of pressuring Putin or willing to do so.
"Trump appears to have no leverage with Putin whatsoever — indeed, it looks just the opposite," Mathers said. "So far, we have seen Trump and his senior officials echoing Kremlin's talking points and showing how eager they are to re-establish diplomatic and trading relations with Russia without asking Russia to make any concessions at all."
Oleg Sukhov
Risks and effectiveness
If Russia agrees to a European military presence in Ukraine, the deployment of peacekeepers would still involve considerable risks.
"These troops would be under constant risk and potential fire, which is why it is so important to provide U.S. support and guarantees," Havlicek said. The troops should be there not to fight, but to provide security for the ceasefire and build trust, including ensuring that the conflict does not escalate into a bigger war if Russia resumes military hostilities."
The effectiveness of the potential peacekeeping force also depends on the rules of engagement.
"A lot depends on the terms of any deal and the role for peacekeepers that is built in: what their terms of engagement would be," Mathers said. "We have a situation in the 1990s where UN peacekeepers sent to Bosnia had very limited terms of engagement and ended up being largely ineffectual. We will see if today's political leaders have learned anything from that experience, or indeed if there is any institutional memory of it."
Shea argued that "Putin would definitely like the return of the former OSCE observer mission, which proved ineffective at stopping the continuous ceasefire violations in the Donbas."
The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) monitored the front line in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts from 2014 to 2022. Russia violated ceasefire agreements 25 times during the period, according to Zelensky.
Shea also said that European peacekeepers would likely "not be on the front line but guarding cities and infrastructure to the rear."
"So, how much fighting ability and deterrent effect they will have on Russia is open to question," he added. "Especially if Russia doesn't withdraw its own forces and heavy weapons from forward positions."
Oleg Sukhov
What kind of US backstop do they need?
European countries have said that they needed a "backstop" from the U.S. for a peacekeeping force in Ukraine. They implied some kind of support or security guarantees but did not elaborate on the issue.
Melvin argued that "30,000 (European peacekeepers) would not be able to enforce a ceasefire on their own."
"Without a U.S. security guarantee — and here there would be uncertainty about whether President Trump would respond to an attack on the European force even if he had made a previous commitment — and given Russia's comments, there would be considerable risk that these troops would be targeted by Moscow in the future," he added.
Shea said that Europeans could "try to have the U.S. involved in other ways: for instance in supplying air defense assets, logistics and intelligence and allowing the NATO command structure (which depends heavily on U.S. military officers and infrastructure and communications) to provide the planning for the operation."
"Ideally, the U.S. could also provide a reserve or extraction force for the Europeans in a crisis situation, but this will probably be a big ask for Trump and the Pentagon," he added.
"Having the U.S. involved in some way will increase the chances that European countries like Germany, Spain, or Italy, which are currently hesitating to contribute to the force, would do so in the future as U.S. troops on the ground will enhance the overall deterrence capability of the force."
Mathers said that the Europeans "want the U.S. to commit to retaliating against Russia using American forces (probably air capabilities) if Russia breaks any ceasefire or peace deal."
"They want an Article 5 assurance that an attack by Russia on European troops in Ukraine will be regarded by Washington as an attack on the U.S. and respond accordingly," she added.
"I doubt they will get this, given Trump's increasingly pro-Russia line, but they might get, for example, an agreement to have U.S. aircraft stationed nearby, patrolling the skies over Ukraine, or something of that nature. Even that, though, would be a stretch for Trump, I suspect."
Kyiv Independent reporter Asami Terajima contributed to this article.
Oleg Sukhov
