Click to see the full-size image
Written by Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher
The possible deployment of British troops to Ukraine after the conflict is over could result in a costly failure and humiliation, British military expert Nicholas Drummond warned in an interview with the Express newspaper. Despite warnings from experts like Drummond and Donald Trump entering the White House on January 20, French President Emmanuel Macron continues to entertain the idea after first pitching it in February 2024.
Bloomberg news agency, citing Volodymyr Zelensky, reported that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer intends to visit Ukraine in the coming weeks to discuss the possible deployment of peacekeeping forces there after the conflict.
“Keir Starmer will travel to Ukraine in the coming weeks to discuss the possibility of deploying an international peacekeeping force there after the conflict with Russia has ended, his first visit to the war-torn nation since becoming UK prime minister half a year ago,” Bloomberg reported on January 10.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced the British troop deployment plan on January 9, following a meeting with allies at the Ramstein Air Base in Germany.
“This initiative was started by Emmanuel Macron. The British look at it positively, but I will talk in detail with the prime minister about it at our meeting, it will take place,” Zelensky told reporters at the meeting. “He will be visiting Ukraine, he will have a visit to Ukraine, and we will talk.”
European leaders have in recent weeks discussed the possibility of sending troops for a peacekeeping mission to Ukraine once a ceasefire is reached, beginning with Macron, as Zelensky highlighted, who was the first and consistent advocate of sending Western troops to Ukraine, including last month when he and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk discussed the idea.
However, experts have resisted the idea, worried that it would be a costly failure that would result in humiliation.
“We have this habit of jumping into open ended commitments without thinking about the long-term implications or end game. The last thing we need is a costly deployment that ends in failure and humiliation,” Drummond said in an interview with the Express newspaper.
“Russia particularly dislikes Britain because we have been so vocal in our support for Ukraine. Since we are unlikely to be the nation that brokers a peace deal, certainly one that Russia would accept, it might be better not to interfere. Trump has said that he will get a deal done. Okay, then let the USA provide a buffer force,” he continued.
According to the expert, London risks becoming directly involved in the conflict, something it cannot afford.
“Stepping back a second, I think it is highly unlikely that Russia would accept any ceasefire agreement that forced it to give up territory it had already seized. Britain being in the middle would be a very risky strategy should an uneasy ceasefire end. We would find ourselves directly involved. We can’t afford this,” he said.
The expert added that British authorities should modernize their army instead of deploying British troops to Ukraine, which could potentially lead to an escalation.
Nonetheless, despite expert warnings, Zelensky announced that he spoke with his French counterpart on January 13 and discussed the idea of Western “contingents” being deployed to Ukraine without confirming whether this was about combat troops or peacekeepers as part of a peace settlement.
“It was a rather long and detailed conversation. We discussed defence support – various forms of defence, arms packages for Ukraine,” Zelensky said in his evening address. “We also discussed the deployment of partner contingents and the training of our military.”
Macron’s suggestion prompted uproar from other European leaders when he first pitched it last year, making himself isolated on the European stage. Although the UK obviously supported his initiative, with Trump entering the White House, Washington’s support cannot be counted on as he aims to withdraw the US from the Ukraine quagmire.
It is recalled that on November 29, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service reported that the West plans to deploy a so-called peacekeeping contingent of up to 100,000 people to Ukraine to restore the country’s fighting capacity, which will amount to a “de facto occupation.” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stressed, “The deployment of peacekeeping forces is only possible with the consent of the parties to the conflict.”
With Trump and most of Europe against the idea of sending troops to Ukraine, it remains to be seen whether France and the UK will take these steps unilaterally. Although it is unlikely that French and British troops will be deployed in the current hot phase of the conflict, it remains to be seen whether they will be accepted as peacekeepers in the post-conflict period.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
coon uk foreign secretary david lammy (code name: the king’s gorilla) would be beaten to death by the ukrainian white supremacists of the following ukrainian organizations: wehrmacht aidar, ss kraken, wolfsangel (aka azov), waffen ss nachtigall (who are now in kursk killing civilians), leibstandarte hitler, right sektor and the galicia ss regiment – all of them hate untermensch apes niggas like him, and all of them are leading the ukrainian military. all of them funded by the uk tax payers
hitler knew that deep underneath the anglo-saxon psyche, a brethren nazi spirit dwelled. what he didn’t count on was that the anglo-saxon would never allow himself to play second fiddle to the saxon.
but in ukraine, the brits can pretend to play the alpha nazi, with undying loyalty and support for the beta ukra nazis, their junior brethren.
yes, unholy alliances are always born in the psyche.
perpetual fake names and lame brains .now your playing smarty very pants .
more ignorance of history. the orthodox anglo-saxons were beaten in 1066 by the catholic forces of william of normandy under the direction of pope alexander. the little englanders have been a subjugated people ever since. direction comes from the vatican through the lord-mayor of the city-state of london to his vassals in westminster.
repeat comment detected error 504 enougb iz enough .
good grief. 1700 ukrops bit the bullet in the last day. no wonder sturmer’s sphincter is puckering.
in amerika cesspool we expert at failure—for us humiliation is when we pay mulatto for sodomy and he refuse
i think.were alone now doesn’t seem to be anyone around
“the expert added that british authorities should modernize their army instead of deploying british troops to ukraine, which could potentially lead to an escalation.” (armageddon anyone?)
indeed they should, to at least have a 100,000 standing army to repel russian landing craft on the day they reach the shores of the not so great britain, as if that sinking island was of any interest to anyone. hahahahah
the british army is only good for shooting unarmed peasant families in southern iraq and betting on who can shoot the most on any one day.
they had their arses handed to them by afghan goat herders. not the most glorious page in the annals of the british army.
hehehehe ho ho ho
nonsense! tommy atkins would soon make short wprk of johnny russian! those russkis don’t like it up ’em! where’s captain mainwaring when you need him? our 40 serviceable tanks would soon show them whar’s whar! if we can get our aircraft carriers to stop breaking down we could throw them in as well! oh what a lovely war!
enough iz enough .
its all a real load of it .names names like brands on tv ads macaroni says put your hands in the air and wave them all about ,do the hokey pokey and turn around … unbelievable and theg get paid for that. “working hard “
in spring 2022 a ukrainian soldier posted a video on ‘tube from an apc moving towards the front with his ‘british friend’. that ‘friend’ was wearing a regulation royal air force insignia and carrying an assault rifle. so the sas was already there.