With Russia continuing to press against Ukraine’s already stressed military and new tensions arising due to U.S. President Donald Trump’s urging for a resolution in the ongoing conflict that has persisted for nearly three years, discussions among Kyiv and its European allies have intensified on how to achieve a lasting peace that ensures Ukraine’s security.
Various proposals have emerged over time, but the one currently gaining traction involves the potential deployment of thousands of European troops to Ukraine. These forces would operate independently of NATO, intended to act as both a deterrent and a rapid response unit in the event of renewed Russian aggression—an idea that is likely to be met with resistance from Moscow.
Ukraine has indicated openness to ceasefire negotiations, yet President Volodymyr Zelenskyy emphasizes that any security assurances from allied nations are critical to achieving a sustainable peace. Without such guarantees, Zelenskyy warns it would be only a matter of time before Russia would make another military incursion. Ukrainian officials reference past agreements made with the Kremlin—such as the 2014 and 2015 accords following Russia’s unlawful annexation of Crimea—which were soon disregarded amid Moscow’s 2022 offensive as evidence that mere agreements lack enforceability.
The determination regarding whether Russia would seek to conclude the war remains uncertain, especially as its forces seem to maintain the upper hand despite enduring significant casualties. Concurrently, European nations are recognizing the implications of a potential Ukrainian defeat for their own security. “This isn’t merely a matter of Ukraine’s sovereignty. If Russia is victorious in this aggression, the repercussions will reverberate across Europe for a long time,” remarked U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer during a recent visit to Kyiv.
In light of Trump’s return to the presidency and his implied threats to withdraw critical U.S. support unless European allies step up their involvement, several European leaders have expressed their commitment. French President Emmanuel Macron has asserted that constructing security assurances for Ukraine is fundamentally a European responsibility, while Starmer echoed that the U.K. is prepared to play an active role in any forthcoming peacekeeping operations.
While Ukraine sees NATO as its strongest defense against Russia, Trump’s skepticism and that of certain prominent European leaders regarding a NATO-led peacekeeping initiative creates complications. One concept that has not gained sufficient momentum is a significant expansion of military support to Ukraine designed to deter future Russian offensives—something likely reliant on U.S. backing that may not be assured under Trump’s leadership.
An additional proposal emerged from Ukraine’s allies suggesting defenses against large-scale Russian aerial assaults, mimicking the U.S. support that protected Israel from Iranian drone incursions last year. However, experts caution that this could expose advanced Western defense technologies to Russia, providing them insight for future military strategies.
Another noteworthy idea, initially proposed by Macron nearly a year ago and resembling the Korean armistice model, includes deploying Western troops within Ukraine to serve as both a deterrent and a rapid-response team. Zelenskyy emphasized the necessity of having a sufficient number of these allied forces to counterbalance Russia’s manpower advantage. He also articulated the need for a robust supply of arms, particularly long-range missiles capable of striking critical Russian military sites deep within its territory, although Trump opposes this approach.
Amidst these discussions, European leaders are contemplating the practical ramifications of providing military and financial support, as well as the political risks involved should troops be sent to Ukraine, potentially placing them in harm’s way. Discussions around the presence of allied troops in Ukraine face considerable skepticism, as Russia perceives Ukraine as a region within its sphere of influence and would likely view any escalated Western military presence negatively.
According to statements from former Russian officials, including those from Putin’s government, the idea of NATO forces stationed in Ukraine would be “categorically unacceptable” and might ignite “uncontrolled escalation.” Still, some Ukrainian advisors suggest that ongoing “technical discussions” with allies may yield opportunities for a compromise depending on Ukraine’s willingness to make concessions.
This week, Zelenskyy expressed that he envisions the need for tens of thousands of allied troops to ensure fortified support. If a coalition of European nations agreed to deploy troops, it would represent a significant commitment to Ukraine and signal Europe’s resolve to be involved. However, questions surrounding military capacity, resources, and the ability to compensate for anticipated reductions in U.S. assistance under Trump create a complex scenario.
Macron’s proposal would need further elucidation on troop deployment locations, national contributions, and necessary capabilities to ensure effectiveness since such parameters would reflect on the troops’ operational readiness and capability to respond. Ukrainian officials have framed the potential deployment of allied troops as serving a dual role: as peacekeepers and a tripwire force committed to counterattacking against Russian aggression.
Nevertheless, traditional peacekeeping missions necessitate UN authorization, which Russia could easily obstruct, and they typically lack a guarantee to engage militarily in case of an attack—contrary to Ukraine’s security aspirations. While this initiative stands outside the NATO framework, existing models like NATO’s multinational battalions in Baltic states or stabilization efforts in Bosnia are often referenced.
Zelenskyy has engaged with allies such as the U.K., France, Poland, and Baltic nations regarding the French proposition for troop presence, but it would inevitably face strong opposition from Putin. Nevertheless, initiating negotiations regarding a Western troop presence may afford European nations some leverage with Russia, potentially shifting the dynamics of the conflict.
