Posted on 03/26/2025 12:05:03 PM PDT by marshmallow
PARIS/BRUSSELS, March 26 (Reuters) - European efforts to create security arrangements for Ukraine are shifting from sending troops to other alternatives as they face political and logistical constraints, and the prospect of Russia and the United States opposing their plans, officials said.
France, which has been working closely with Britain to come up with options, will host 30 leaders and delegations from around 30 countries on Thursday, part of what has become a "coalition of the willing" to try and flesh out some ideas.
But while London and Paris have been working for weeks on a plan to send thousands of troops to Ukraine to help safeguard a future ceasefire, diplomats say there is growing acceptance that sending such a force is not the likeliest outcome.
"They are taking a step back from ground troops and trying to re-dimension what they were doing to something that could be more sensible," said one European diplomat. Said another: "When Ukraine was in a better position, the idea of sending troops appealed. But now, with the situation on the ground and the U.S administration as it is, it's not very sexy."
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
They have no money to send, no troops, maybe they can write poems
Loudmouth pussies.
Wow, that didn’t even last a month.
Yeah, they were perfectly willing to send our troops in, they would gladly back us up, but won’t go in without us. Sort of like a Yorkie and a poodle standing under a mastiff barking their heads off.
As Vlad said, “They will threaten but eventually they will sit down at Trump’s feet and wag their tails”.
Someone in their military told the Prime Ministers, sir, we don’t have any soldiers to send.
The UK has maybe 10,000 combat ready soldiers, the French and Germans are not any better.
Reality setting in. They have been depending on American handouts for far too long.
“France, which has been working closely with Britain to come up with options, will host 30 leaders and delegations from around 30 countries on Thursday, part of what has become a ‘coalition of the willing’ to try and flesh out some ideas.”
Putting 30 cooks in the kitchen is not a good idea.
They could always draft their muzzies... Lol.
The main problem these countries have is that none of their citizens want to die for their WEF Ukraine project.
Now if they want to send their own families or go themselves, that could be workable.
There was never going to be a deployment of UK or French troops to Ukraine.
I’m actually surprised they didn’t maintain the fiction for a while, but it’s likely the Germans discovered that authorizing the ECB to issue printed pieces of paper does not buy things that do not exist, at any price, like troops and weapons.
OTOH it’s another opportunity for 30 folks to have expensive dinners for free.
An acceptable to Russia offer must include what will be Russian minimums:
1. a neutral Ukraine
2. no foreign forces in Ukraine
3. no long-range missiles in Ukraine
4. no nuclear weapons or nuclear weapons technology development by Ukraine
5. Russia, Russian companies and individuals to get their assets (plus a fair return on financial assets) back on a schedule
6. the Russian language to be an official language of Ukraine
7. Russian ethnics and Russian speakers in Ukraine to have Ukrainian legal protection as great as the anti-discrimination protections extended to negroes by the domestic governments of the USA and fully equal Ukrainian/EU treaty civilian rights
Yup.
1. I don’t see any issues with that but the EU and US dems will go back to their usual meddling and screw that one up.
2. Non-starter, the war itself is more than enough justification for a peacekeeping force to keep the Russians honest, no foreign troops would mean this could easily repeat and we’d be right back where we started.
3. Yup
4. Easy enough to agree to
5. This will be unlikely but maybe some compromise is possible. Ukraine and the west will need some way to recoup the war debt.
6. After this war, it’ll be open season on anyone in Ukraine speaking Russian from any number of avenues. I’d say that’s a non-starter as well and not even worth trying to negotiate but if they do they aren’t going to keep their word.
7. They can agree to it but I doubt they’ll hold to it at the very least you’ll see vigilante movements acting on their own and the government doing little to stop them. Even if they agreed to it it’d be worthless.
I think for points 5,6, and 7 combined it’d be a hard no but they’ll give up the Donbass and Crimea entirely. They can’t retake them without US troops and frankly all of those points are solved by segregating the population and sending the ethnic Russians there rather than having to do anything for them in Ukraine, might be better off for them too since the hatred is going to run deep.
Starmer always said they would need to have “US backing.”
In other words, they were hoping to finagle Trump into a war with Russia (with a false flag attack or some other scheme and then invoke the NATO charter). Then, after the US had brought Putin to heel, the Euro-weenies could move in to plumb Russian natural resources with some nice plummy contracts.
Well, Trump wasn’t the US yokel the Europeans were fantasizing about, so now they have to think of something else.
Doesn’t sound like Vladimir.
Huh! When WE were involved, they were all about troops, and whatever it takes. We say we’re out, and suddenly they have no troops. Amazing!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.