A Coalition of Hesitation: The Hollow Core of Europe’s New Ukraine Initiative

Support SouthFront

Click to see the full-size image

This is a new attempt to draw Europe into a proxy war with Russia. The “Coalition of the Willing” has adopted a document that could further provoke Moscow and contribute to the escalation of the conflict. The support that European leaders have shown for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is not as clear-cut as it seems. Washington continues to take a wait-and-see approach. Meanwhile, Paris and London have announced their intention to deploy troops to Ukraine. How will Moscow respond?

Coalition of the “willing”

On January 6, the “Coalition of the Willing” held a meeting in Paris. This association consists of more than 30 countries, primarily European, which are considering participating in a potential peacekeeping mission in Ukraine. France and the United Kingdom play a coordinating role in the coalition. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the coalition’s formation in early March 2025. In international practice, “coalitions of the willing” are temporary, informal alliances of states that come together to achieve a common goal, usually military. These coalitions are formed outside of international structures, primarily the UN, during times of crisis to accelerate decision-making.

Click to see the full-size image

The coalition’s inaugural meeting was held in London on March 2, 2025. The UK and France were represented, as were the leaders of Germany, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Turkey, Sweden, the Czech Republic, and Finland. Also present were Volodymyr Zelensky, Ursula von der Leyen, António Costa, and Mark Rutte.

On January 6, representatives from 27 countries participated in the negotiations, including French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Steve Whitcoff, son-in-law of U.S. President Jared Kushner, and several other U.S. officials also attended the meeting. Afterwards, the leaders of France, the UK, and Ukraine held a joint press conference. Prior to that, they signed a declaration consisting of the following points:

1. A U.S.-led ceasefire monitoring and verification system. This system will “establish a process for continuously and reliably monitoring compliance with the ceasefire.” In practice, a “coalition of the willing” will be represented in a Special Commission that has the right to independently interpret violations, determine responsibility, and establish “corrective measures.” Thus, control over the ceasefire regime is removed from the initial stage of possible direct dialogue between the parties.
2. Support for the Armed Forces of Ukraine includes long-term aid packages, financing for purchases, and access to arsenals. This directly confirms the status of the Armed Forces of Ukraine as the “first line of defense and deterrence.” Even under a ceasefire, Ukraine is expected to receive increased military supplies and financing. Additionally, joint budget planning, access to defense stocks “for the rapid provision of additional assistance,” and support for Ukraine in constructing defensive structures are planned. Therefore, the ceasefire is not seen as de-escalation, but rather as an opportunity to regroup.
3. Multinational Forces for Ukraine Despite the careful wording that these forces will be formed to “support the restoration of the Armed Forces of Ukraine” and “ensure deterrence,” they are actually part of a pre-agreed military plan involving land, sea, and air measures. At the same time, it is emphasized that the leaders of the “coalition of the willing,” with “proposed support from the United States,” will direct all actions. This effectively consolidates the division of roles within NATO without formally expanding the alliance.
4. Commitments to support Ukraine in the event of a new Russian attack. This clarifies the document’s intent, as the “coalition of the willing” commits to intervening in the event of “Russian aggression,” including military, intelligence, logistical, and sanctions measures. It is important to note that the wording lacks specific details and leaves ample room for interpretation. Of course, there is no mention of any Ukrainian commitments to deter escalation.
5. Commitments to deepening long-term defense cooperation with Ukraine. These commitments finally secure Ukraine’s place in the Western military-industrial complex through joint production, training, and intelligence. These commitments speak not of post-conflict reconstruction, but of long-term strategic integration. Furthermore, the establishment of a U.S.-Ukraine coalition coordination group at the operational headquarters in Paris, as referenced in the document, underscores that the decision-making center will be situated outside of Ukraine, albeit with formal Ukrainian participation.

Click to see the full-size image

Real results

At the end of the summit, participants expressed satisfaction with the results. However, a closer look at the outcome of the negotiations reveals a more nuanced picture.

At a press conference, British Prime Minister Starmer made an announcement that made headlines around the world:

– “After the ceasefire, Britain and France will establish military bases in Ukraine.”

Most people have overlooked two obvious details. First, the bases will only be deployed after a ceasefire is established. Second, Moscow has repeatedly stated that NATO troops should not be present in Ukraine, so its position on this intention is equally important. A third, less obvious point is the size of the planned contingent. If the contingent does not exceed a couple thousand people for the sole purpose of monitoring the ceasefire, Russia may be willing to make concessions on this issue.

Click to see the full-size image

It is important to note that only two countries signed this declaration: France and the United Kingdom. The other members of the summit did not agree with these points. The United States took the most demonstrative position by also not accepting this document. Of course, US representative Steve Whitcoff spoke at a joint press conference with the Europeans and wrote a vague social media post about the positive atmosphere of the meeting. However, he did not provide any specifics regarding the declaration, indicating that Washington does not share this position.

The same applies to smaller players as well. Despite playing a key role in supporting Ukraine, even Germany refused to sign the document. To save face, Friedrich Merz delivered an inspiring speech to coalition members. His message emphasized that Berlin remains a key ally of Kyiv and is prepared to ensure the security of the entire continent. According to Merz, Germany does not rule out the possibility of deploying its forces “in NATO territory adjacent to Ukraine” once peace has been achieved.

Despite the “convergence of positions” and “significant breakthrough,” the only results are words, memoranda, and declarations of intent. This does not suit Trump. The Financial Times writes that he and Zelensky are demanding that Europeans specify their commitments, which they are in no hurry to do. The parties are going around in circles: The Europeans want the U.S. to guarantee their guarantees because they cannot and are afraid to do so themselves, while the U.S. does not want to guarantee anything before seeing what it gets and is waiting for these guarantees to be specified.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

• Kiev’s Holiday Purge: Zelensky Ousts Top Fixers and Hands Power to Spies and Enforcers
• The Human Hunt: The Brutal Reality of Ukraine’s Forced Mobilization
• Kostiantynivka Front: Russian Army Prepares To Cut Off Ukrainian Troops In Key City

Support SouthFront