What hurdles does Europe's peace plan for Ukraine face?
Whatever words are used to frame the plans emerging from Sunday's summit of 19 mainly European leaders in London - ceasefire, truce or peace plan - the challenges ahead are enormous.
The UK's Prime Minister Keir Starmer, along with French President Emmanuel Macron, hope this will be the plan to eventually bring lasting peace to Ukraine.
At its heart lies what Sir Keir is calling the "coalition of the willing", those who would help to guarantee peace in the event of a deal being reached.
But what are the hurdles – and how easily can they be overcome?
First, can Europe's depleted armies and half-empty arsenals muster anything approaching a substantial deterrent force to deploy to Ukraine? What nations, other than the UK and France, will be willing to send forces into such an uncertain scenario given the doubts over US support?
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said it would need an international force of up to 200,000 troops to sustain a ceasefire along the 600 mile (960km) line of contact between the two opposing armies, Russia and Ukraine.
Although that figure is wildly optimistic, the Ukrainian leader is correct in assessing just how many would be needed to act as a sufficient deterrent to any future Russian incursions.
In reality, Europe will struggle to come up with even a third of that number, such is the effect of decades of running down its militaries, years after the post-Cold War peace dividend should have ended.
Air power would be crucial. This is both for what is known as ISR [Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance] and for repelling any future Russian incursions.
There is no point having a brigade of UK troops sitting on part of the notional ceasefire line if thousands of Russian troops and armoured vehicles are pouring through a gap 100 miles away and there is no adequate means to repel them.
The US has a huge capability in Signals Intelligence, Sigint, as well as air-to-air refuelling, without which a purely European force would struggle. A recent report by the London-based think tank the International Institute for International Affairs (IISS) stated:
"Europe's reliance on Washington's military capabilities, especially critical enablers such as ISR and air-to-air refuelling, will make pursuing 'independence' a major challenge without major investment in those areas."
It goes on to say that: "The US also contributes over half of all Nato's fighter and fighter ground attack aircraft."
In short, putting together a credible deterrent force to protect Ukraine would be extremely challenging, if not impossible, without US military backup.
Donald Trump likes to say that he doesn't start wars, he stops them.
The last thing he wants to do right now is to commit US combat troops and air power to a notional unstable ceasefire line which has the potential to erupt into a shooting war that drags in Nato forces.
Instead, he has telegraphed his preferred way to end this war, which is to cut a deal direct with Russian President Vladimir Putin, one-on-one.
Sir Keir's aim is for Europe to come up with a credible ceasefire proposal which can then be presented to President Trump in the hope - and I would emphasise that word "hope" - that he then agrees to provide a US military backstop.
So far, that looks unlikely.
Why on earth would it? - some would argue.
Its ground forces are winning on the battlefield, albeit at a horrendous cost in human lives and Ukraine has all but lost its greatest ally in this war: the US.
Without America's military support, Ukraine will be hard-pushed to hold back advancing Russian troops in the east and south-east. Without US Patriot missiles, its cities will be even more vulnerable to mass missile attacks by Russia.
President Putin has always made it clear he will not accept the presence of Nato member troops in Ukraine. Now that he effectively has an ally in the White House, he is even less likely to give way on this point unless President Trump can offer him a major inducement in return.
The bottom line in all this is that the Kremlin has not given up on its maximalist aims for Ukraine which is to eventually bring the whole country back into Moscow's orbit, replacing Zelensky with a pliant, pro-Russian puppet.
At the bare minimum, it is unlikely to budge on its core demand that Ukraine permanently cede not only those territories Russia already occupies - in Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk and Luhansk regions - but also gives up the adjacent cities of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, forcing hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian residents to either flee or become Russian.
Starmer announces 'coalition of the willing' to guarantee Ukraine peace
Was Starmer's summit enough to sway Trump?
Jeremy Bowen: Trump-Zelensky row signals looming crisis between Europe and US
How the Trump-Zelensky talks collapsed in 10 fiery minutes
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
9 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
You Can't Legislate Fertility
Nobody ever had a baby for the tax break. That's a simple reality that doesn't seem to have dawned on the social conservatives pushing what they call 'family friendly' provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act currently working its way through the Senate. The bill contains several provisions that advocates say will be a boon to new parents and shore up the struggling American family. Don't count on it. Birthrates across the West have been plummeting for decades. In 1960, the average American woman had 3.65 children in her lifetime. That's fallen to about 1.6. It's a big problem in need of an urgent solution. But the fix won't be found in the tax code. European countries have showered families with tax incentives and child-care subsidies for years. All to no effect. In France, the law guarantees generous parental benefits, including paid leave, cash birth grants, child-care payments, mortgage support, and lower fares on public transit. For all this largess, fertility is no higher in France than in the U.S. In Hungary, the example par excellence of family-friendly public policy, birth rates are lower than they are here—and falling. The West is undeniably in the midst of a dangerous demographic collapse. The reasons are complex and hotly debated. Changing sex roles have certainly played a part. The female labor-force participation rate has nearly doubled since 1955. The precipitous decline in religious belief is also to blame. One thing's for certain: Tax policy has nothing to do with it.
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump signals readiness to de-escalate after Iran's largely symbolic attack
The White House is signaling it is open to de-escalation in the Middle East after Iran's retaliatory strikes Monday appeared to be largely symbolic and did not cause any casualties. Iran fired more than a dozen missiles at the Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, a response to U.S. strikes over the weekend that targeted three Iranian nuclear facilities. But Iran provided advance notice of the strike, a signal that Tehran was not looking to provoke additional American military action. 'I am pleased to report that NO Americans were harmed, and hardly any damage was done. Most importantly, they've gotten it all out of their 'system,' and there will, hopefully, be no further HATE,' President Trump posted on Truth Social. 'I want to thank Iran for giving us early notice, which made it possible for no lives to be lost, and nobody to be injured,' Trump added. 'Perhaps Iran can now proceed to Peace and Harmony in the Region, and I will enthusiastically encourage Israel to do the same.' Trump met with members of his national security team in the Situation Room on Monday as the White House monitored the Iranian strikes on the base. The president's response came just hours before he is expected to leave for the NATO summit, where he will meet with allies in The Hague. 'Congratulations world, it's time for peace!' Trump posted on Truth Social. The Department of Defense said the attacks were from short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles. Roughly 10,000 U.S. troops are stationed at the base, which Trump visited last month during a trip to the Middle East. A spokesperson for the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement that Qatari air defenses 'thwarted the attack and successfully intercepted the Iranian missiles.' Qatari officials had closed the nation's airspace in anticipation of the strikes, citing 'concern for the safety of citizens, residents, and visitors.' The U.S. Embassy in Qatar had also advised U.S. citizens in the country to 'shelter in place until further notice,' saying the alert was issued 'out of an abundance of caution.' Iran's actions Monday came at a precarious moment in the Middle East, and it puts the spotlight back on Trump and his appetite for engaging militarily in the region. It has become a rare subject of division among some of Trump's supporters, and the president himself has sent mixed signals in recent days. While Trump has touted Saturday's operation targeting three Iranian nuclear facilities as a success, others in the administration have been more circumspect about whether Iran's nuclear facilities were fully destroyed. 'Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,' Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Dan 'Razin' Caine told reporters Sunday. Since Saturday, Trump has left the door open to future strikes if Iran retaliates, and he mused Sunday about the idea of regime change in Iran in a social media post. 'If the Iranian regime refuses to give up their nuclear program or engage in talks … why shouldn't the Iranian people rise up against this brutal, terrorist regime?' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Monday. 'That's a question the president raised last night. But as far as our military posture, it hasn't changed.' Trump also boasted in a post Monday about the U.S. nuclear arsenal in response to comments from former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev about supplying nuclear warheads to Iran. Some officials who have worked with Trump argued his instinct would be to avoid further escalating the conflict, however. 'He's not going to get involved in regime change or boots on the ground. He's going to stop at stopping this nuclear program,' said one official who served in Trump's first administration. Taylor Budowich, a senior White House official, suggested in a post on the social platform X that Trump had eliminated an obstacle to diplomacy by targeting Iran's nuclear program with a military strike. 'Their manic pursuit of nukes was the kryptonite to making a deal, because the leaders just couldn't bring themselves to giving them up,' Budowich wrote. 'Thankfully the regime has been released from that burden—there is no better time than now for peace.' The president has in recent weeks been subject to lobbying publicly and privately from advisers and allies over how to handle the conflict between Iran and Israel, which sparked up nearly two weeks ago when Israeli forces attacked Iranian nuclear sites and killed top military officials. Some allies had urged Trump to take decisive, targeted action against Iran, arguing it was a leading sponsor of terror groups and that its pursuit of a nuclear weapon risked national security. Other fervent Trump supporters, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), had argued engaging directly in the Middle East would contradict the president's pledge to avoid new foreign conflicts. 'He's made the case, and I think just about all of his MAGA followers are behind him, that the Iranian nuclear program posed a significant threat to U.S. national security,' the former Trump administration official said. 'Stopping Iran from getting the bomb is part of 'America First.' Most people in the MAGA movement are standing with him on this.' Members of Congress will be able to probe the administration about next steps on Iran on Tuesday. Officials will hold a classified briefing at 3 p.m. EDT for the House, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) announced, adding, 'Hopefully, they will present it in a manner that's comprehensive. It will be probed, it will be tested, it will be aggressively pushed back against, and then we'll see what the outcome is.' Meanwhile, markets are bracing for the possibility Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz. The president called on everyone to 'keep oil prices down' Monday morning, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also warned against shutting down the strait, calling on China, Iran's most crucial oil customer, to help keep it open. About 20 million barrels, or 20 percent of global consumption, flowed through the strait in 2024, and markets in China, India, Japan and South Korea would likely be the most impacted by a closure. 'I can assure you the administration is actively and closely monitoring the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, and the Iranian regime would be foolish to make that decision,' Leavitt said Monday.
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump seeks deescalation after Iran's ‘weak' retaliation
Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here IRAN LAUNCHED MISSILES at a U.S. Air Force base in Qatar on Monday, following the U.S. attacks on three Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend. The Qatari foreign Ministry said the nation 'thwarted the attack and successfully intercepted the Iranian missiles.' President Trump sought to deescalate the situation, characterizing it as a 'weak' attack that could potentially allow for an off-ramp from war. Posting on Truth Social, Trump said Iran gave the U.S. and Qatar a heads-up before the strike. He said no one was killed and no damage was done, as 13 of the 14 missiles fired were 'knocked down' and the remaining missile was 'set free' because 'it was headed in a nonthreatening direction.' 'I am pleased to report that NO Americans were harmed, and hardly any damage was done,' Trump said. 'Most importantly, they've gotten it all out of their 'system,' and there will, hopefully, be no further HATE. I want to thank Iran for giving us early notice, which made it possible for no lives to be lost, and nobody to be injured. Perhaps Iran can now proceed to Peace and Harmony in the Region, and I will enthusiastically encourage Israel to do the same.' Iran announced the attack on state television, calling it 'a mighty and successful response by the armed forces of Iran to America's aggression.' But there are early signs that attack may have been meant as a face-saving move by Iran. The New York Times reports: 'Three Iranian officials familiar with the plans said that Iran gave advance notice that attacks were coming, as a way to minimize casualties. The officials said Iran symbolically needed to strike back at the U.S. but at the same time carry it out in a way that allowed all sides and exit ramp.' Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, told MSNBC's 'Chris Jansing Reports': 'Hopefully, this is performative. Hopefully, this is the Iranian regime saying, we can't afford to let the attack on our nuclear facilities go unanswered. It will be performative, that we will say, look, we can reach these people, and then maybe we can get back to trying to deescalate a very, very dangerous situation. But, again, it's too early to say.' MEANWHILE… Israel is continuing its bombardment of Iran, issuing a new order to residents of Tehran to evacuate. Early Monday, Israel bombed the gates of Iran's notorious Evin Prison and conducted additional strikes against Iran's Fordow nuclear facility, which the U.S. struck Saturday. Israel also says it hit Iran's nuclear research facility and killed additional top commanders. IRAN CONFLICT HANGS OVER NATO SUMMIT The president is scheduled to fly to the Netherlands on Tuesday for the annual NATO summit, though his plans could change due to the evolving crisis with Iran, as it did when he left the Group of Seven summit last week. The White House has been touting the surprise strikes against Iran as a resounding success, even as the U.S. braces for Iran to retaliate. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday the administration has a 'high degree of confidence' the strikes hit Iran's uranium enrichments stores, although a full accounting could take some time. The United Nations nuclear chief said Fordow likely sustained 'very significant damage' from the U.S. 'bunker buster' bombs dropped from B2 bombers that took off from a base near Kansas City, Mo. 'Obliteration is an accurate term,' Trump posted on social media. Trump and his officials have at times given conflicting messages about what's next from the U.S. Vice President Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have been adamant that regime change is not under consideration and that there are no further planned military operations, unless Iran escalates. However, Trump on Sunday night mused publicly about overthrowing Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Trump wrote. Iran has been ratcheting up its rhetoric toward the U.S., promising a 'proportionate response,' although there are questions about Iran's capabilities, as Khamenei's closest advisers have been assassinated and Israel's bombing campaign appears to have badly damaged Iran's military infrastructure. Still, Iran has options beyond a direct military response. The Iranian Parliament approved a measure to close the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global oil choke point. Rubio is urging China, an ally to Iran, to intervene to prevent Tehran from closing the waterway. Oil prices initially spiked after the U.S. bombing, but they've fallen since Iran's counterattack. There are fears Iran could activate terrorist sleeper cells, potentially within the U.S. 'Though we have not received any specific credible threats to share with you all currently, the threat of sleeper cells or sympathizers acting on their own, or at the behest of Iran has never been higher,' U.S. Customs and Border Protection Rodney Scott said in a memo obtained by NewsNation. Russia, another Iranian ally, appears to be a wild card. Russian President Vladimir Putin said Monday that the U.S.'s 'unprovoked aggression' has 'no justification.' Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said over social media that 'a number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads,' eliciting a furious response from Trump. 'Did he really say that or, is it just a figment of my imagination? If he did say that, and, if confirmed, please let me know, IMMEDIATELY. The 'N word' should not be treated so casually,' Trump posted. Medvedev later clarified that 'Russia has no intention of supplying nuclear weapons to Iran.' However, Russian presidential spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Monday that Russia stands ready to help Iran, but it 'all depends on what Iran needs.' CONGRESS RESPONDS The response to the U.S. strikes on Iran largely cut along partisan lines, although there was dissent in both parties. Most Republicans were on board with the strikes, seeing them as a necessary step to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. However, the vocal anti-war right criticized Trump, with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) saying the strike was unconstitutional. Trump is at the end of his wits with Massie, who opposed the GOP's mega-bill over spending and debt concerns. Trump's allies on Monday launched a super PAC aimed at ousting Massie. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who opposed U.S. strikes, argued that breaking with Trump on this issue is 'not disloyalty' to his presidency.' Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) posted on X: 'We must not forget Congress holds the war-power. If we don't our nation drifts further from both liberty and peace.' Some Democrats, including pro-Israel members, such as Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.) and Rep. Ritchie Torres (N.Y.), praised the strikes. 'The world can achieve peace in the Middle East, or it can accept a rogue nuclear weapons program—but it cannot have both,' Torres posted on X. 'The decisive destruction of the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant prevents the dangerous spread of nuclear weapons in the world's most combustible region. No one truly committed to nuclear nonproliferation should mourn the fall of Fordow.' But some Democrats, led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), are calling for Trump to be impeached, arguing the strike violated the Constitution and Congressional War Powers. 💡Perspectives: • The Spectator: On Iran, trust Trump's instincts. • Chris Murphy: Trump's bombing was illegal. • The Guardian: Trump starts a reckless war based on a lie. • American Spectator: Let's hope this isn't Trump's 'Mission Accomplished'. • The Free Press: After the bombs. Read more: • How Iran could retaliate after US strikes on its nuclear program. • Trump hits Iran: 5 questions on what comes next. • NATO agrees to higher defense spending goals. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vetoed a total ban on recreational cannabis that had been backed by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, causing a rare rift between the state's top elected officials. Abbott signed a bill that will force manufacturers of processed foods and drinks to put warning labels on any products containing 44 different food additives or dyes believed to be toxic. Credit scores will begin accounting for consumers who choose the 'pay later' option at checkout. A massive heat dome will envelope many parts of central and eastern U.S. this week, leading to levels of heat and humidity that are historically rare in June. AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite President Trump's agenda bill faces a critical week ahead, with Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) expected to bring the legislation to the floor soon for a series of procedural votes. Republican anxiety over the fate of the bill is growing, with Trump's July 4 deadline for passage fast approaching. GOP fiscal hawks are dug in, saying they won't vote for the bill because of its spending and debt levels, underscored by the legislation raising the debt ceiling by $5 trillion. Cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and debate over how quickly to phase out renewable energy tax subsidies have emerged as new fault lines in the Senate. And some conservatives, led by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), say they won't support the bill over cuts to Medicaid. 'It seems to me that now we're in a place where this provision is threatening the entire bill, and we just don't have time for that,' Hawley told Axios. 'The idea of having now to go to a conference committee with the House because they say, well, we can't pass this… I mean, good lord, that's just a nightmare scenario,' he added. The Hill's Alexander Bolton writes: 'The cross-cutting criticisms from different parts of Thune's conference, combined with the tight timetable, has many observers doubting the Senate will get to the promised vote this week.' MEANWHILE… The Senate Parliamentarian splashed cold water on portions of the bill, including language authorizing states to conduct immigration enforcement and language barring immigrants who are not citizens from receiving SNAP benefits. The parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, also ruled against text that would have made it more difficult for courts to enforce contempt findings against the Trump administration. Provisions that the parliamentarian decides violate the Senate's Byrd Rule cannot pass with a simple-majority vote, so they'll have to be removed if Republicans hope to circumvent a Democratic filibuster. 💡Perspectives: • The Liberal Patriot: The unequal effects of free trade. • Center for Medicine in the Public Interest: Unmasking cost drivers in healthcare. Read more: • Democrat battle over Connolly's Oversight seat comes down to wire. • Trump ropes Fed into debt fight as GOP faces fiscal mess. • GOP orders panel to score extension of Trump tax cuts as budget neutral. • How Senate Republicans want to change the tax breaks in Trump's big bill. The Democratic primary for New York City mayor takes place Tuesday. New York Assembly member Zohran Mamdani has effectively drawn even with former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D), according to a new poll. Press Office Sen. Chris Van Hollen, via Associated Press The Department of Justice (DOJ) appealed a judge's ruling that Kilmar Abrego Garcia be released as he awaits trial on human trafficking charges. U.S. Magistrate Barbara Holmes of the Middle District of Tennessee ruled Abrego Garcia is not a flight risk and can be released. Holmes set a hearing for Wednesday to determine the parameters of Abrego Garcia's release. The government responded with a motion to stay the order to keep him in custody. Earlier this month, prosecutors said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would take Abrego Garcia into custody if he was released ahead of his trial. Abrego Garcia's case has become a proxy in the broader political battle over President Trump's deportations. Abrego Garcia, who entered the country illegally, was deported to his home country of El Salvador, despite an immigration court's ruling that he must not be sent home due to threats against his life. After a weeks-long standoff, Abrego Garcia was returned to the U.S., where he now faces human smuggling charges. MEANWHILE… Mahmoud Khalil, the former leader of Columbia University's pro-Palestinian movement, was released from ICE detention over the weekend. In an interview with The New York Times, Khalil vowed to continue protesting, despite the government's efforts to deport him. Khalil, a green card holder, still faces a deportation hearing, but a judge ruled he's not a flight risk and could be released until his legal dispute is resolved. Khalil returned to Columbia University over the weekend, where he spoke at a pro-Palestinian rally. 'The wave of repression that the Trump administration initiated with my detention was intended to silence the movement for Palestinian liberation,' Khalil said at the rally. 'It was intended to scare people into silence. It was intended to distract us from the fact that the U.S. government is a killing machine in Palestine and across the world.' The Syrian-born activist was among the first campus protesters arrested by the Trump administration in its crackdown on anti-Semitism at universities. The administration cited a rarely-used provision of immigration law that says a person can be deported if the secretary of State determines they are a threat to U.S. foreign policy. 'I literally laughed,' Khalil told the Times. 'What did I do that I'm a foreign policy threat to the United States? Did I, like, damage, the U.S.-Israeli relationship? Because it doesn't appear so.' 💡Perspectives: • The Hill: Prosecuting officials challenging ICE raids won't be easy. • Washington Examiner: Dems embrace arrest theater to protect criminals. • The American Prospect: Trump's bigoted travel bans. • USA Today: Dems keep falling into Trump's traps on immigration. • L.A. Times: Newsom stood tall against Trump. Is he presidential timber? Read more: • Judge blocks administration effort to bar international students at Harvard. • DNC leader faces growing scrutiny amid party turmoil. • Trump ropes Fed into debt fight as GOP faces fiscal mess. • Republicans express concern about lack of Trump trade deals. Someone forward this newsletter to you? Sign up to get your own copy: See you next time!
