EU divided over peacekeeping forces in Ukraine: Times

Berlin opposes the idea, partly because it does not want to commit ahead of its February elections, according to the British daily newspaper.

The Baltic states and Poland – among Kiev’s most vocal supporters throughout the conflict – are reportedly concerned that such a deployment would divert NATO’s attention and resources away from their own defense, leaving them “exposed.”

The UK, France, and the Nordic nations are the most vocal advocates for a Western peacekeeping mission. However, even among them, officials worry that the EU would not be able to carry out the operation without US involvement.

A European diplomatic source told The Times that Washington’s participation would be necessary because “they have capabilities that all of Europe lacks,” including the “ability to retaliate at scale if needed.” US President Donald Trump has previously stated that Washington should not provide troops or funding for such a mission.

Kiev’s European backers were also reportedly “irked” by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s recent demand for a “minimum” of 200,000 peacekeepers – a number the EU alone would struggle to provide.

Moscow has consistently rejected the idea of Western-led peacekeepers in Ukraine. Earlier this week, senior Russian diplomat Rodion Miroshnik warned that any military force entering Ukraine without Russia’s consent would be considered a legitimate military target.

“If Russia does not buy the idea it is dead and if the US does not provide a hammer the idea is dead,” an unnamed senior Western military official admitted, according to The Times.

The Kremlin could perceive a large-scale NATO troop deployment in Ukraine as a significant threat to Russia, potentially serious enough to trigger another mobilization wave, Aleksey Zhuravlev, First Deputy Chairman of the Russian State Duma Defense Committee, warned on Friday.

Some EU officials believe a non-Western UN peacekeeping force, composed of troops from more neutral countries such as India, Bangladesh, or China, would be a “wiser alternative.” This approach, they argue, would not require US participation and might be more acceptable to Moscow.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated in December that any talk of deploying peacekeepers is moot at this point, given that Zelensky signed a law banning any talks with the current Russian leadership.

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service has warned that the West could use peacekeepers to “occupy” Ukraine and once again buy time for a new conflict with Moscow.