British Peacekeepers For Ukraine

 

 

 

In the flurry of political activity and multinational meetings at all levels since it became obvious that the USA can no longer be considered to be a reliable ally of Europe, the idea that a European peacekeeping force might deploy to Ukraine post-conflict has taken hold.

This has in many ways been the initiative of British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and his notion of ‘a coalition of the willing’, but it has gained some traction with both France and now Germany seemingly on board.

To date details are sketchy as to what such a force might comprise and where it might be deployed. Quoted numbers of personnel vary from 60,000 down to 20,000 and the consensus appears to be that, rather than being posted in a modern iteration of the Thin Red Line along a front that extends to over 2,000 kilometres, it will be deployed to protect key sites like cities and power stations, amongst others.

French President Macron, the other prime mover in this initiative, has now christened it as a ‘reassurance force’, which seems apt. It would now appear that Britain, France, and Germany will be the main contributors if it happens, although other European states have pledged support.

Britain’s potential role in a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine is far from straightforward, with the parameters being set by the complexities of the situation on the ground and the intricacies of international diplomacy. The UK will need to draw on its historical experience, its military professionalism, and its commitment to international law.

British forces are recognised for their military’s reputation for high standards of training, professionalism, and flexibility; these will stand it in good stead and could provide a much-needed stabilizing influence in any post-conflict environment.

Happily British troops, especially those with experience in previous peacekeeping deployments in the Balkans and Africa, are well-versed in navigating complex political landscapes. In the Ukrainian context, where trust between Russian and Ukrainian forces is fragile, and the potential for flare-ups will be ever-present, the British contribution would likely focus on the high-end skills of peacekeeping, particularly in monitoring ceasefires, de-escalating tensions, and maintaining security in sensitive zones.

Experience of conduction joint operations with NATO allies will also be helpful. British forces would be able to integrate fairly seamlessly with multinational units, ensuring a robust, unified approach to peace enforcement. Moreover, British military doctrine emphasizes the importance of a comprehensive approach to peacekeeping—one that integrates military, diplomatic, and humanitarian efforts to create a secure environment for reconstruction and reconciliation.

Another valuable contribution the UK could make would be in training and advisory roles. British military experts could assist in training of Ukrainian forces to ensure they are capable of maintaining internal security and defending against any resurgence of aggression.

The big question is, of course, how many troops will be required in total, and how large and from where will the UK contribution be drawn? It’s no secret that the army in particular is hard-pressed to fulfil current commitments and that recruiting and retention is dire.

In other words, what will not be able to do if this new commitment lands in its lap? The Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ Spring Budget Statement revealed a welcome uplift of £2.2 billion for the armed forces for the next financial year, but it will be barely sufficient to fill the holes in capability that are already there.

Something else will have to give if the UK is to provide troops and equipment for the potential ‘reassurance force’ for Ukraine. But what?

Lt Col Stuart Crawford is a defence analyst and former army officer. Sign up for his podcasts and newsletters at www.DefenceReview.uk

 

 

Lt Col Stuart Crawford’s latest book Tank Commander (Hardback) is available now

• http://www.DefenceReview.UK
• @peoplemattertv
• @509298