Volunteer coalition to discuss peacekeeping forces for Ukraine
A coalition of 35 global leaders, calling themselves the "Volunteer Coalition" for Ukraine, met on Thursday, September 4.
The group included heads of state from Europe, Japan, Australia, and Canada, with 28 joining remotely via video conference and nine attending in person.
The discussion, which ran for 90 minutes—longer than expected—confirmed that the US would take part in a potential collective peacekeeping operation if Kyiv and Moscow were to reach a peace agreement. While the practical details of such a multinational force remain to be defined, the signal to Moscow is a powerful one.
French President Emmanuel Macron announced that 26 countries, primarily European, have committed to a "reassurance force" as part of a future Russian-Ukrainian armistice. This could involve deploying troops or a "presence on the ground, at sea, or in the air."
This multinational coalition is notable for cutting across political lines. Macron is a centrist, Keir Starmer is a Labour Party member on the left, and Friedrich Merz is a Christian Democrat on the centre-right.
The varying positions of each country regarding the deployment of ground troops—intended to secure and supervise a potential agreement, not to fight—must be considered. France and the UK are at the forefront. The UK, a key ally of France and the continent's second nuclear power despite no longer being in the EU, co-chairs the coalition with Paris. They are followed by Belgium, whose Prime Minister Bart De Wever was in Paris on Thursday, and the three Baltic states. In total, only six countries have explicitly declared their support for sending ground troops, but 26 are prepared to back the initiative in some capacity.
The six countries that have made a serious commitment would not be able to fight against the Russian army. According to military experts, they could not collectively deploy more than 15,000 to 20,000 personnel—similar to the maximum troop levels deployed by Europeans in Afghanistan.
Germany and Poland, whose leaders were in Paris, hold a complex and ambiguous position: they favour sending European troops but not from their own countries, which would only participate financially and logistically. Conversely, Italy, Hungary, and Slovakia are openly hostile to sending soldiers.
Macron is the only European leader who can send troops abroad without parliamentary approval, provided he later details his reasons to the legislature. However, he is currently politically weakened at home and is likely to face a no-confidence vote against Prime Minister François Bayrou's cabinet on Monday. This entire spectrum of contradictory positions among European countries highlights the need for general consensus for such a decision—a distinct challenge for democracies.
Freezing Russian assets
Among other measures, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas spoke last week about the possibility of using more than €200bn in frozen Russian assets held by the Euroclear banking structure in Belgium. The European Commission is working on the possibility of moving the assets into a "Special Purpose Vehicle" to minimize legal risk. The EU currently uses these to guarantee a €50bn loan to Ukraine but has not touched the principal. Even German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated on Saturday that Russia will end the war against Ukraine only when it runs out of military resources.
European aid to Kyiv
According to the Kiel Institute, Europe has provided around $95bn in military aid to Kyiv since June, surpassing the $75bn from Washington. However, most of the weapons are still manufactured in the US. In August, the US President confirmed that European allies had agreed to purchase US-made weapons for Ukraine. The US State Department announced the delivery of 3,350 long-range ERAM cruise missiles to Ukraine, valued at $825m (€705m). Although the order was officially placed by Kyiv, the funds came from Denmark, the Netherlands, and Norway.
Translation by Iurie Tataru
