Soldiers of the Guard Battalion (Wachbataillon) of the German Armed Forces (Bundeswehr) arrive for a ceremony at the Defence Ministry in Berlin on July 20, 2025.
Odd Andersen / AFP
Russia has made it clear it will not accept NATO soldiers stationed in Ukraine.
European leaders are once again discussing sending troops to Ukraine as part of possible security guarantees for the war-torn country, but the debate has highlighted the same old problems: indecision, military weakness, and a continuing reliance on the United States.
At recent meetings in Washington and European capitals, EU leaders raised the idea of a multinational force to guarantee peace in Ukraine should a ceasefire with Russia be reached.
Yet as with previous pledges, concrete action is lacking.
French President Emmanuel Macron has insisted that any forces would not be combat troops but rather a symbolic presence “to signal solidarity.”
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz admitted that any German role would have to be debated in the Bundestag and remained deliberately vague, saying it was “too early” to decide.
Outgoing Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof was similarly hesitant, stressing that The Hague would only discuss contributions if peace talks progressed. “Whether our boys and girls will actually be deployed in Ukraine, for example, is by no means certain,” he said.
Other countries have been more assured in their statements, with Britain’s defence secretary, John Healey, saying the UK is “ready to put boots on the ground” from the first day of a ceasefire, and Lithuania promising a deployment similar to its Afghanistan missions, meaning several hundred soldiers.
Analysts warn, however, that Europe may be making bold statements but has little capacity to follow through.
“Those who have large battalions on the ground in Europe do not want to go there,” said researcher Stéphane Audrand, noting that only France and Britain have even hinted at real deployments. “Few within the alliance can imagine military action without the Americans—not even the British,” he added.
Germany’s foreign minister Johann Wadephul admitted Berlin cannot realistically send troops, as its armed forces are already overstretched by commitments in Lithuania.
Poland, sitting on NATO’s frontline, has flatly refused to send troops, preferring to keep its army at home where it enjoys full NATO protection.
The reliance on Washington remains stark. Despite Europe’s talk of “strategic autonomy,” most capitals will not move without a U.S. backstop.
For his part, U.S. President Donald Trump has made it clear that no American ground troops will be sent, but has promised air support and other forms of security assistance. “European nations are going to take a lot of the burden. We’re going to help them and we’re going to make it very secure,” he said in Washington.
European leaders, from Italy’s Giorgia Meloni to EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, have floated the idea of “Article 5-like” guarantees for Ukraine. But such commitments remain vague and unenforceable without American power behind them.
Also, Russian officials have rejected the idea of NATO countries sending peacekeepers to Ukraine. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Russia “categorically rejects any scenario that envisages the appearance in Ukraine of a military contingent with the participation of NATO countries.”
While European governments argue endlessly over what they can deliver, they remain militarily weak and politically divided—and as always, dependent on the United States to do the heavy lifting.
Zoltán Kottász is a journalist for europeanconservative.com, based in Budapest. He worked for many years as a journalist and as the editor of the foreign desk at the Hungarian daily, Magyar Nemzet. He focuses primarily on European politics.
