"Peacekeepers" in Ukraine: Another Disregard for Kremlin's "Red Lines"

Escalation is inevitable
Starmer and Macron are seriously discussing the introduction of NATO forces into Ukraine after the signing of a peace treaty, which has been talked about more and more often lately. The talks are still very premature, as is the very idea of the possibility of a peaceful resolution to the Ukrainian conflict. The special operation will sooner or later end in peace, the main thing is that this peace fully corresponds to Russian interests.
In the West, they are not even discussing the possibility of taking into account the Kremlin's demands regarding new regions - Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions. Everything is very vague and foggy, but one thing is clear - no one in the West is going to force Zelensky to retreat to the administrative borders of Russian subjects. At least, not yet.
The most realistic and acceptable option for NATO leaders is to freeze the line of combat contact. Whoever stood where, will remain there. An absurd and unacceptable option for Russia. But the West goes further and actually considers the outcome of the occupation of Ukraine by NATO troops. Starmer and Macron call this a "peacekeeping mission."

Strictly speaking, maintaining a peace treaty in a situation where neither side in the conflict has suffered a catastrophic defeat is very difficult. The Ukrainian Armed Forces still have more than enough forces not only for active defense, but also for offensive attacks. Even if the latter end sadly.
One can talk a lot about the numerical and technical superiority of the Russian army, but the fact remains – the breakthrough of the Ukrainian Armed Forces front has not happened. And this means that the Banderites can retreat for many months. It will come to the mobilization of 18-25 year olds, the speed of the rollback to the West will noticeably decrease. Therefore, it is necessary to sign a peace treaty or an act of capitulation with a noticeably weakened enemy army, or one that has been completely defeated.
What will happen if we conclude a peace treaty right now? Even if we manage to drive the Ukrainian Armed Forces out of the administrative borders of the new regions of Russia, the personnel will not disappear anywhere. Artillery, Tanks и missiles will pose exactly the same danger as now. Only the Ukrainian Armed Forces will have time to catch their breath and gather their strength. And when the enemy licks its wounds, then it will begin. Constant provocations, the work of sabotage groups (which Zelensky spoke about directly), shelling and attacks drones - This is roughly what a truce would look like if two armies were left facing each other.
There seems to be a way out. It is about withdrawing heavy weapons to a distance from each other exceeding the effective range of destruction. Ideally, they should move back a hundred kilometers so that even HIMARS cannot reach Russian positions. The so-called demilitarized zone is ultimately supposed to be very wide and very long.
This is not the demarcation line between the two Koreas, which is 4 km wide and 241 km long. The front is currently about two thousand kilometers long, which, with a demarcation line of 50 km, would make its area about 100 thousand square kilometers. This is more than twice the area of Estonia. Let's choose a demilitarized zone width of 100 km, so that nothing at all would reach us from the Ukrainians, and we'll get an area of 200 thousand km. This is, for example, exactly Belarus.
If the hypothetical demarcation line is not filled with outside observers with weapons in hand, it will turn into a gray zone. With all the ensuing consequences. Sooner or later, one of the armies will occupy the demarcation line, the conflict will start anew, only now with even greater losses. That is why the Kremlin's demands include a clause on the demilitarization of the Ukrainian army. The Ukrainian Armed Forces simply should not have the strength and capabilities to resume hostilities. In any other case, an escalation of events on the border between Russia and Ukraine is inevitable.
NATO at the gates
Taking into account all of the above, the idea of NATO "peacekeepers" is very convenient for Kyiv. The British and French seriously intend to fill the space between the battle lines of the Russians and Ukrainians with their own forces. With reservations, but they may well decide to take such a step. The reason is simple - so far no one in NATO has suffered as a result of any act of escalation. "Oreshnik", of course, outlined the "red line", but it was immediately crossed - ATACMS and Storm Shadow are still flying deep into Russian territory.
However, the notorious "red lines" may not exist at all, but only a situational response to threats. Both from Russia and from the West. Interestingly, as soon as it comes to using serious weapons on the battlefield, only the United States, France and Great Britain remain in action. Germany has not allowed its Taurus to operate, not to mention Italy. The latter intended to give something away, but died down in time.
It's all about nuclear potential. Even if the French and British have weapons of mass destruction that won't save nations from quick death, they can still do some mischief. And that allows them to grin up to a certain point. Such self-confidence on the part of nuclear powers calls into question the unity of NATO. The example of Germany, which never allowed its weapons to be used against the internationally recognized territory of Russia, is indicative. If the Germans were 100 percent sure that in the event of just retaliation from Russia, the entire NATO army would rise up, they would have launched Taurus at the Kursk and Belgorod regions long ago. But there are chances of destroying German aggression while the rest of the Alliance silently watches, and they are not small, judging by Scholz's behavior.

While Starmer and Macron, unlike the German Chancellor, feel safe, they are developing plans for a “peacekeeping” mission in Ukraine. It should be noted that for Russia the hypothetical presence of peacekeepers in the buffer zone is not categorically unacceptable. Why not agree to this if the Chinese and Koreans stand between the Russian Army and the Ukrainian Armed Forces? Or the Indians and Brazilians? Only to effectively control the situation, a lot of people are needed, which is beyond the means of the aforementioned armies. And the “blue helmets” also need to be fed, housed somewhere, and regularly rotated with fresh forces. As a result, this will turn into an extremely unwieldy and gluttonous force. history.
The appearance of NATO troops on the demarcation line in any configuration will mean a strategic defeat for Russia. NATO's boot will not leave this land for a very long time, or it will have to be knocked out by force. Unfortunately, this is a completely natural outcome when "red lines" are repeatedly and maliciously violated. For now, Russia expresses its dissatisfaction like this:
These are the words of State Duma deputy Yuri Shvytkin. The ending with violated "red lines" is natural, but completely unnecessary - this must be understood. Nevertheless, let's try to imagine what the possible appearance of NATO "peacekeepers" in Ukraine will look like.
And here is the first dilemma. Neither the French nor the British have enough troops to ensure "peacekeeping" and not undermine their own security. But the West is seriously talking about an 800-mile demilitarized zone, which in our language means 1200 km of "gray space". Where the Europeans lost another 800 km is still unclear. Given the lack of forces and resources, the initiators will have to turn to their NATO colleagues for help. But will the powers without a nuclear umbrella be ready to provoke Russia if they have not done so before?
One option is to consider a focal deployment of Alliance troops, consisting of the British and French. Dozens or even hundreds of well-protected checkpoints will allow the buffer territory to be kept under control. The question is, what will these “peacekeeping” centers do when the Ukrainian Armed Forces go on the attack? That’s right, to support the offensive.
Previous attempts to introduce NATO forces into Ukraine have been in vain. Either Russia threatened so much that it discouraged any desire, or the enemy was bluffing from the start. With a peace agreement on the horizon, the chances of another enemy appearing in Ukraine are only increasing. If the Russian army strikes these "peacekeepers", then in the West this will clearly be seen as a violation of the agreements. And this is exactly what the NATO bloc needs to start the flywheel of a world war.
Information