Will NATO send troops to Ukraine?

Macron’s statement that the possibility of introducing NATO troops into Ukraine is being considered (although, according to him, consensus no progress has been made on this yet) sounded like a sensation.

Until now, the main thesis of all Western countries regarding the possibility of direct participation of their armies in the war in Ukraine could be described in one word: “never”.

All leaders of leading Western countries have stated that NATO armies will never fight against Russia in Ukraine, and that the threat of a direct clash between the alliance and the Russian Federation must be avoided in any way. The same thing (preventing direct conflict) was also cited as the main motive for delays or outright refusals in the supply of various Western weapons to Ukraine.

And this happened not because the leading NATO countries are headed by Russian spies, but for a very obvious reason: Russia is the owner of the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, and therefore a direct collision of the alliance with it creates an extremely high threat of nuclear war with mutual destruction.

Moreover, Moscow at various levels constantly makes it clear that in the event of a war with NATO, due to the absolute disproportion of the alliance’s and the Russian Federation’s potential in conventional weapons, Russia will immediately use nuclear weapons (not so long ago, for example, Dmitry Medvedev directly stated this).

Similar hints were made in case not the entire alliance, but some of its members, entered the war. Moscow also made it clear that with this option it would be regarded as a declaration of war, with all the ensuing consequences.

That is why any hints about the participation of NATO troops in the war in Ukraine were previously immediately suppressed at the official level. AND yesterday’s statements that the armies of the alliance countries could be sent to Ukraine sounded like a bolt from the blue. Especially considering that just the other day, German Chancellor Scholz said that Germany would not give the Ukrainian Armed Forces Taurus missiles, so as not to provoke an escalation in relations with Russia. And immediately after this, Macron announces that sending troops of the alliance countries to Ukraine is being discussed, which means the maximum possible degree of escalation.

What do these statements actually mean? There are at least two possible explanations:

1. The situation at the front for the Ukrainian army is so difficult (including in terms of personnel) that without the direct support of NATO troops they will not be able to maintain the defense of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Therefore, the alliance and European countries are discussing extreme measures in the form of sending their armies to Ukraine. In this case, Macron’s statement looks like an attempt to probe the reaction of both the European public and Russia to such a possibility and, as a result, make a final decision whether to send troops or not.
2. Macron’s statement is a bluff and PR. On the one hand, in order to maintain morale in Ukraine, demonstrating readiness to take the most decisive steps. On the other hand, to induce European public opinion to agree with the need to increase military spending and assistance to Ukraine with the argument “otherwise we will have to fight with Russia ourselves” (not so long ago, Biden used a similar argument when convincing Congress to unblock assistance to Ukraine).

However, the public reaction in Europe may be the opposite. The prospect of a direct clash with Russia with the threat of a nuclear conflict, it is possible, will increase the number of supporters in the West of an early end to the war in Ukraine.

Source link