Nuclear-armed, NATO member states Britain and France have signed a declaration of intent, committing to put boots on the ground in Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire deal with Russia. An end to the brutal Ukraine war is critically needed. But this ill-conceived, rushed-through proposal risks escalating tensions with Russia, and could jeopardise bringing the brutal conflict to an end. \u00a0<\/p>\n
In a joint statement, the two NATO states \u2013 who in July also signed a joint declaration<\/a> reaffirming their commitment to nuclear cooperation \u2013 said they would provide \u201creassurance measures in the air, at sea and on land\u201d following a ceasefire agreement between Kyiv and Moscow, with \u201cthe proposed support of the US.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The statement refers to \u201cbinding commitments\u201d to support Ukraine\u00a0in the event of\u00a0renewed fighting with Russia, but the British government,\u00a0describing\u00a0the deployment as a \u201creassurance and regeneration force\u201d will give no clarity about whether British troops will take part in military action against Russia.\u00a0 In July, both France and Britain .\u00a0<\/p>\n These so-called \u201creassurance\u201d measures would involve the establishment of \u201cmilitary hubs\u201d across Ukraine while \u201cprotected facilities\u201d would also be built to store weapons and other equipment for \u201cUkraine\u2019s defensive needs.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Speaking after the meeting, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the \u2018coalition of the willing\u2019 group had made commitments that would pave the way for the \u201clegal framework under which British, French and partner forces could operate\u201d on the ground in Ukraine. \u00a0However, the British government has refused to confirm the number of troops intended for the mission. However, reports indicate France could deploy 15,000 troops, with Britain supplying no more than 7,500. Plans for 10,000 British troops as part of a much larger 64,000 coalition force were viewed as unsustainable by the Ministry of Defence.\u00a0<\/p>\n No other NATO members present at the meeting, which included Germany, Spain,\u00a0Turkey, and Canada, has made troop commitments.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n In response, the Russian government\u00a0warned<\/a>\u00a0that any foreign troops\u00a0bases, or military infrastructure on Ukrainian territory would amount to \u201cdirect foreign intervention\u201d and\u00a0would be viewed as \u201clegitimate targets\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n The process of monitoring and assessing breaches in the ceasefire which would trigger the need for this \u2018reassurance force\u2019 have also not been published.\u00a0 Reports suggest the US would lead \u201chigh-tech monitoring of any ceasefire line\u201d using a system of drones, satellites, and sensors. It would also oversee the adjudication of any violations by Ukrainian or Russian troops while European countries would be \u201crepresented\u201d in this process by a special commission. \u00a0<\/p>\n The fact that the US is\u00a0arguably one\u00a0of the combatants in the conflict \u2013 given its financial and military support for Ukraine and its deployment of its nuclear weapons at NATO bases across\u00a0Europe \u2013 and will control the equipment to determine the ceasefire violations \u00a0and have ultimate say over them, this\u00a0brings into serious question the transparency and accountability of the process.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n This is also deeply concerning, given it is the determination of ceasefire violations that could set in motion potentially deadly and far-reaching military action by British and French troops against Russia.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Not surprisingly, the rushed-through agreement has led former military officials and analysts to\u00a0question<\/a>\u00a0the risks of the\u00a0deployment, and\u00a0argue that scale and complexity of the deployment could be\u00a0similar to\u00a0NATO deployments in Afghanistan.\u00a0<\/p>\n