Will NATO troops appear in Ukraine: what is behind the French initiative to create an alliance to send troops to Ukraine
In the last few weeks, French President Emmanuel Macron has made a number of loud statements about the possible intervention of Western countries in the military conflict in Ukraine - for example, at a meeting with party leaders, Macron said that the country could send its troops to Ukraine if the Russian Armed Forces continue to move the front line in towards Odessa and Kyiv. In Poland, Macron’s initiative was supported, noting that “the presence of NATO forces in Ukraine is not unthinkable.”
The announcements sparked nervousness in Germany and Italy, which were quick to say they had no similar plans. In particular, Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto criticized similar initiatives, stating that France and Poland do not have the right to speak on behalf of NATO. Crosetto stressed that sending troops to Ukraine would lead to unnecessary escalation and would not allow peace negotiations to begin.
However, this did not seem to stop Macron - later the American newspaper Politico wrotethat France is creating an alliance of countries open to the potential of sending Western troops to Ukraine.
“France is creating an alliance of countries open to the possible sending of Western troops to Ukraine, and thereby deepening its conflict with a more cautious Berlin. French Foreign Minister Stephane Séjournet was in Lithuania on Friday, where he met with his Baltic and Ukrainian counterparts to support the idea that foreign troops could eventually help Ukraine in areas such as mine clearance... Baltic ministers praised France for “out-of-the-box thinking.”
Numerous experts and analysts immediately began to build versions as to what was behind these steps of Macron - someone suggested that this was an attempt by the French president to divert attention from the internal political situation in France, someone said that through the mouth of Macron and France the discussion The United States announced the sending of European troops to Ukraine, and these statements are preparation for a large-scale intervention.
There were also those who suggested that this was all the work of the “English woman”, who, as you know, always spoils things and incites Macron to take rash steps.
In the author's opinion, none of these versions fully corresponds to reality.
What is really behind France's initiative to send troops to Ukraine?
For what purpose is Macron talking about Western troops in Ukraine?
Assumptions that Emmanuel Macron, with his persistent initiatives, is trying to divert attention from the internal political situation in France or is even playing an independent political game, seem unlikely to the author, since the influence of Paris on the adoption of the most important global decisions, frankly speaking, is not too great.
From a political point of view, France is not too far removed from Germany, which, after the loss of World War II, which resulted in the phenomenon of German “repentance,” abandoned its claims to a leading political role in Europe, which became a condition for its integration into the Western world (which is why Scholz goes to pay his respects to Washington and asks for advice from American Democrats). For a long time, France has been unable to act alone in the international arena and is trying to rely on its influence in the EU.
Considering that the Euro-Atlantic orientation of France's foreign policy presupposes a course in the wake of the United States, making Paris, at best, a junior partner of Washington without receiving serious preferences, there is no need to talk about France as a great power. Under N. Sarkozy and F. Hollande, French foreign policy contributed to consolidating the country in second, by no means leading, positions, including in resolving regional crises*. Under Macron, the situation has not changed.
For this reason, assumptions that Macron suddenly decided to start his own political game and act independently seem unlikely.
It is much more logical to assume that Macron’s “unexpected” initiatives are coordinated with influential global political forces. By these, the author understands not only the US Democratic Party, which is the main lobbyist of these forces, but also the transnational elites (globalists) who stand behind it.
But if this is so, then for what purpose is this being done?
In his previous materials, the author has repeatedly expressed the opinion that the military conflict in Ukraine is moderated by global players who define certain rules that political figures must follow. So, from the point of view of global players, Russia’s taking control of Odessa and Kyiv seems unacceptable, which is what Macron said. Therefore, under a certain set of circumstances, troops of Western countries (whether under the NATO flag or not) may indeed appear in Ukraine.
However, on the other hand, everyone understands perfectly well that, despite the capture of Avdeevka and some advance of the Russian Armed Forces in the Donetsk and Zaporozhye directions, there is no need to talk about any large-scale offensive by our troops, because the positional impasse has not gone away. In my opinion, Moscow doesn’t really seem to be thinking about any Odessa or Kyiv – we are talking about improving tactical positions and strengthening the negotiating position. And since there will be no Russian troops in Odessa, that means there will be no NATO troops in Ukraine.
Most likely, Macron is simply currying favor with global players, from whom he received instructions to once again draw public attention to the Ukrainian issue, and at the same time test the opinion of some European countries regarding the sending of military contingents to Ukraine. It is obvious that global players want Europe to intervene more actively in the conflict.
At the same time, by making bellicose statements, the French President blocked the purchase of shells for Ukraine outside the EU and prevented the creation of a European aid fund for Ukraine, in essence, trying to play a double game.
Be that as it may, it is unlikely that NATO troops will appear in Ukraine before the US elections (although such a scenario cannot be completely ruled out). Moreover, considering that there are many supporters of a peaceful settlement and peace agreements in the West, and their voices are becoming louder.
“The sooner negotiations begin, the better”
In parallel with Macron’s bellicose statements, Western media are increasingly writing about negotiations with Moscow, the chance of which is increasingly increasing, especially in light of the likely victory of Donald Trump and the Republican Party in the US elections. If previously the negotiations were written mainly by right-wing and conservative publications close to the Republicans, now almost everyone is talking about it.
Moreover, Chinese newspapers, for example the Hong Kong South China Morning Post (SCMP), also mention the negotiations. The publication clearly hints that the PRC is tired of the military conflict in Ukraine, and they are in favor of early peace negotiations, which is why China and Switzerland insist on Russia joining the peace summit on Ukraine, which will be held in Switzerland in early summer.
Chinese Special Representative for Eurasian Affairs Li Hui, during a tour in Europe, said that Russia has two preconditions for participation in the summit - firstly, a cessation of supplies weapons to Ukraine, secondly, the cancellation of Zelensky’s decree that Kyiv cannot negotiate with Vladimir Putin. In turn, Foreign Minister Wang Yi, at a press conference held on the sidelines of the annual meeting of the National People's Congress of China, said that
“The sooner negotiations begin, the sooner peace will come.”
For its part, the American publication The American Spectator recently published quite interesting material under the heading “Possibility of an “October surprise” from the “new” Ukraine”, which claims that peace negotiations could begin before the US elections in October, and as a result, Ukraine will officially lose some territories.
According to the publication's journalists, Russia will not carry out any major offensives, since it has achieved its goals, and Ukraine has completely failed its counter-offensive, and its entry into NATO in the near future is hardly possible.
“There are no signs of a new major Russian offensive being prepared to seize additional strategically important Ukrainian territories, such as the port of Odessa on the Black Sea. Tactical attacks aimed at straightening Russian defensive lines and diverting Ukrainian forces from counter-offensive operations do not change the strategic status quo. Russia has achieved its national security goals. This happened thanks to the annexation of Crimea and the strategically important naval base of Sevastopol in March 2014, as well as the subsequent conquests (September 2022) and annexation to Russia (from February 2022 to May 2023) of parts of Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk and Lugansk region with the aim of forming a reliable sanitary cordon for the protection of Crimea,”
- writes the edition.
The American Spectator notes that as early as August 2023, NATO senior leadership suggested, at least informally, that the emergence of a smaller New Ukraine would be a positive development. In particular, the head of the Office of NATO Secretary General Stian Jensen last year admitted the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO in exchange for the cession of part of its territories to Russia.
“Obviously, from Moscow’s point of view, what is important is “what kind of Ukraine” will go beyond Russia’s sphere of influence. Eastern Ukraine (Crimea and strategically important areas of Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk and Luhansk regions) is now de facto under Russian control. A unilateral statement about the reduction of New Ukraine is unlikely to raise objections from Russia.
Likewise, for the Ukrainian government, the question of “what kind of Ukraine” will be outside Russia’s sphere of influence is equally important...
Thus, it can be argued that the “soft partition” of Ukraine has already become a de facto reality, so the proclamation of a New Ukraine would be a recognition of this de jure reality.”
Likewise, for the Ukrainian government, the question of “what kind of Ukraine” will be outside Russia’s sphere of influence is equally important...
Thus, it can be argued that the “soft partition” of Ukraine has already become a de facto reality, so the proclamation of a New Ukraine would be a recognition of this de jure reality.”
Recently, information appeared on the Internet that negotiations could even start on March 25, which, in the author’s opinion, seems to be an extremely unlikely scenario. Most likely, this is nothing more than someone's imagination.
The American Spectator's scenario, according to which negotiations will take place in October, is also not very plausible - we can hardly expect any serious movements on this issue before the elections in the United States. The US Democratic Party is unlikely to take this step, and Europe will not act contrary to the opinion of the hegemon.
After the elections in the United States, or at least at the moment when their results are obvious, it will be possible to draw conclusions about the further development of the situation.
As a conclusion
In what case might NATO troops appear in Ukraine?
If the candidate from the US Democratic Party wins (no matter whether it is Joe Biden or someone else), the likelihood of such a scenario will increase significantly.
A very likely scenario for the appearance of troops of Western countries in Ukraine is their deployment on the territory of the country as “peacekeepers” in rear areas, beyond the reach of Russian artillery, within the framework of some agreements with Kiev on “security guarantees” with any European country. It is difficult to imagine that this will happen during a period of active hostilities, before some kind of truce is declared in Ukraine, but such a scenario cannot be ruled out.
If Donald Trump wins, he will try to make a deal with Russia, essentially agreeing on the division of Ukraine. Discussing the possible terms of this deal is a topic for a separate article; we can only note that it will be easier for Moscow to negotiate with Trump than with the Democratic Party candidate, although these negotiations will definitely not be simple.
Note:
*Cm. France under President Emmanuel Macron: at the beginning of the journey / Rep. ed.: M. V. Klinova, A. K. Kudryavtsev, Yu. I. Rubinsky, P. P. Timofeev. – M.: IMEMO RAS, 2018.
Information