
What is the coalition of the willing?
– What is the coalition of the willing?
At least 31 countries have signed up to help defend a peace deal in Ukraine, once one is struck, in an effort to ward off a future attack by Russia.
The UK is among those 'willing', with the Government prepared to put 'boots on the ground and planes in the air', Sir Keir said when he unveiled plans for the coalition at London's Lancaster House in March.
But it is not the first of its kind.
Former US president Bill Clinton suggested in 1994 that sanctions could be imposed by a 'so-called coalition of the willing', to quell North Korea's nuclear ambitions, and his successor George W Bush announced a similar alliance in the early-2000s to disarm the then-Iraqi president Saddam Hussein.
– Who has signed up?
Leaders from the UK, France, Germany, Finland and Italy have all indicated their willingness to defend a peace deal in Ukraine.
They joined Donald Trump, who has not signed up to the coalition, and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky in the White House this month.
A total 31 countries are in the coalition, according to the Government's National Security Strategy 2025. Beyond Europe, it has attracted support from the Canadian and Australian prime ministers Mark Carney and Anthony Albanese.
– Will British troops go to Ukraine?
After Sir Keir's commitment to put 'boots on the ground and planes in the air together with others' to militarily defend a peace deal, No 10 unveiled its support for a Multinational Force Ukraine, in an effort to help regenerate Ukraine's own armed forces.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (Jordan Pettitt/PA)
Military chiefs have previously met in Paris to agree a strategy for the force, and to coordinate plans with the EU, Nato, the US and more than 200 planners from 30 international partners.
And in Washington, European leaders discussed early-stage proposals for a security guarantee, similar to Nato's article five principle – that an attack one member is an attack on the entire bloc.
– What has the coalition achieved?
'The coalition of the willing has been successful in advocating for Ukraine and communicating with Trump and the US administration during its outreach to Russia,' says Edward Arnold from the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) think tank.
'Moreover, it has undertaken lengthy military planning and has established a leadership and command structure. However, much remains uncertain, especially the nature of any agreed ceasefire or whether a broader peace process is on the cards.'
But the US's commitment is 'far from certain', he told the PA news agency, and warned that 'European planners cannot progress the planning until the US position is agreed'.
– What is Nato's role?
Nato's Mark Rutte has attended meetings of the coalition of the willing, and Mr Trump appeared pleased with his efforts at their meeting when he described the secretary general as 'a great, great political leader'.
But Mr Arnold warned that an article five-style mutual defence deal could amount to 'de facto' membership of the bloc for Ukraine, something which Russian president Vladimir Putin 'is unlikely to agree to'.
He said: ''Nato article five-style' guarantees are being talked about but Nato is a unique alliance which is not able to be replicated for Ukraine.
'Moreover, if any coalition of the willing member signed a mutual defence clause with Ukraine, and then Ukraine was attacked further, that could conceivably draw that Nato member into direct conflict with Russia, thereby potentially triggering article five.'
Sir Keir has welcomed 'some sort of article five-style guarantees', which he said 'fits' with some of the coalition's work, and Mr Trump who met Mr Putin in an Alaska summit claimed Moscow will 'accept' multinational efforts to guarantee Ukraine's security.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Daily Mail
11 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
The real difficulty ministers face is that the Epping hotel judgment is a clean and fair application of the law: ANDREW TETTENBORN
There's a beautiful irony in the Epping hotel injunction. The Government's immigration policy of putting asylum seekers in hotels in some of the less well-off parts of the country has received a major blow from the legal class that Keir Starmer, Lord Hermer and many of their learned friends themselves inhabit. And it's a blow that sees the long-term viability of the Government's immigration policy unravel, as councils up and down the country will seek to use this ruling to shut down their own troublesome migrant hotels. The difficulty for the Government is that Mr Justice Eyre's decision is a clean, fair, straightforward application of the law. He has ruled that, if planning permission exists for a hotel, it's a blatant breach of planning law to use the premises as a long-term asylum reception centre. Who'd have thought it? At bottom, it's no different from a convoy of travellers breaking planning law by parking caravans on a public recreation ground, or a farmer building a holiday camp on an arable field. The courts regularly issue stiff injunctions in cases like these, and rightly so. But Starmer and the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, were surprisingly complacent, imagining that somehow this didn't apply to their own activities. When the penny dropped at the last minute, they scrambled to influence the result, sending barrister Edward Brown KC to argue that the local authority 'should, in fact, have given some consideration to the wider public interest in this application'. In other words, that an injunction should not be allowed because it would make life very difficult for the Government. Counsel for the hotelier took much the same line, effectively ignoring the concerns of the local people who had been protesting outside The Bell ever since an Ethiopian asylum seeker lodging there was charged with sexual assault against a 14-year-old schoolgirl. 'Fears as to an increase of crime associated with asylum seekers or a danger to schools are common,' he said. 'But that does not make them well founded.' The hotelier's barrister was, of course, doing his job. Nevertheless, such legal arguments blithely take no notice of local problems caused by uncontrolled immigration and the small boats crisis, which has seen more than 50,000 undocumented illegal migrants crossing the Channel to Britain in the 13 months since Labour came to power. Until now, the Home Office has seemed content to dump the problem on councils such as Epping, where voters traditionally mistrust Labour. Now those voters have rightly dumped it back on the Government. What seriously spooks the Home Office is that Epping will not be a lone case. Across the kingdom we could now see multiple injunctions, forcing the Home Secretary in short order to relocate tens of thousands of asylum seekers currently in hotels – there are more than 32,000 according to figures released in March. And it is urgent: The High Court has given the Government only three weeks, until September 12, to vacate The Bell. The Government must act, and fast. One option might be to set up more dedicated reception centres, as in Germany and France. Another is to deter small-boat crossings by making it more difficult for illegal migrants to enter the black economy. The ball is firmly, and legally, in its court.

Rhyl Journal
15 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Trump offers assurances that US troops will not be sent to help defend Ukraine
Mr Trump also said in a morning TV interview that Ukraine's hopes of joining Nato and regaining the Crimean Peninsula from Russia are 'impossible'. The Republican president, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and other European leaders held hours of talks at the White House on Monday aimed at bringing an end to Russia's war against Ukraine. While answering questions from journalists, Mr Trump did not rule out sending US troops to participate in a European-led effort to defend Ukraine as part of security guarantees sought by Mr Zelensky. Mr Trump said after his meeting in Alaska last week with Vladimir Putin that the Russian leader was open to the idea of security guarantees for Ukraine. But asked on Fox News Channel's Fox & Friends what assurances he could provide going forward and beyond his term that American troops would not be part of defending Ukraine's border, Mr Trump said: 'Well, you have my assurance, and I'm president.' Mr Trump would have no control over the US military after his terms ends in January 2029. Speaking later, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that 'US boots will not be on the ground' as part of any potential peacekeeping mission. The president also said in the interview that he is optimistic that a deal can be reached to end the Russian invasion, but he underscored that Ukraine will have to set aside its hope of getting back Crimea, which was seized by Russian forces in 2014, and its long-held aspirations of joining the Nato military alliance. 'Both of those things are impossible,' Mr Trump said. Mr Putin, as part of any potential deal to pull his forces out of Ukraine, is looking for the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, as well as recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. Mr Trump said on Monday that he was arranging for direct talks between Mr Putin and Mr Zelensky. But the Kremlin has not yet said whether Mr Putin, who has resisted previous calls by Mr Trump and others for direct negotiations on ending the war, is committed to a face-to-face meeting with the Ukrainian leader. Asked whether Mr Putin had promised Trump that he would meet directly with the Ukrainian leader, Ms Leavitt responded affirmatively. 'He has,' she said of Mr Putin. Mr Trump, early on Monday during talks with Mr Zelensky and European leaders, said that he was pressing for three-way talks among Mr Zelensky, Mr Putin and himself. But after speaking to Mr Putin later in the day, Mr Trump said that he was arranging first for a face-to-face between Mr Zelensky and Mr Putin and that three-way talks would follow if necessary. 'It was an idea that evolved in the course of the president's conversations with both President Putin, President Zelensky and the European leaders yesterday,' Ms Leavitt said. But when discussing a phone call held after the meeting between Mr Trump and the Russian leader, Mr Putin's foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov gave no indication that either a bilateral or a trilateral meeting with Ukraine had been agreed. Mr Trump said he believed Mr Putin's course of action would become clear in the coming weeks. 'I think Putin is tired of it,' Mr Trump said. 'I think they're all tired of it. But you never know. We're going to find out about President Putin in the next couple of weeks. That I can tell you.' Later on Tuesday, Senator Lindsey Graham told The Associated Press in a phone interview that if peace talks between Ukraine and Russia are not 'moving in the right direction' by the time Congress returns next month, then 'Plan B needs to kick in'. For months, the Republican senator has been pressing Mr Trump to support a bipartisan sanctions bill that would impose steep tariffs on countries helping fund Russia's war. On Tuesday morning, following a phone call with Mr Trump, Mr Graham signalled the president may now be willing to back the effort. 'Trump believes that if Putin doesn't do his part, that he's going to have to crush his economy. Because you got to mean what you say,' Mr Graham told reporters in South Carolina earlier on Tuesday.

Rhyl Journal
16 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Starmer returns to Scotland after family holiday interrupted by Ukraine talks
The Prime Minister's plane flew from the US to Glasgow overnight following the White House discussions, landing on Tuesday morning. It had taken off from the same airport the previous day when Sir Keir was heading to the US for the brief trip. On his return to Scotland, Sir Keir will co-chair a call of the so-called 'coalition of the willing', a group of nations looking to help Ukraine that he has been leading with French President Emmanuel Macron. It is the second summer in a row that the Prime Minister's holiday plans have been disrupted after he cancelled a European trip last August when rioting broke out in the UK and tensions escalated in the Middle East. The Prime Minister also delayed his departure for a trip last Christmas following the death of his brother aged 60 who had been suffering from cancer. A minister has said it is an 'occupational hazard' that prime ministers can see their holidays disrupted. Pensions minister Torsten Bell told Sky News that Sir Keir has been making a 'real difference' in the negotiations over Ukraine. He told the broadcaster: 'It is an occupational hazard for prime ministers that holidays are interrupted. You'll have been covering that for years. 'I've been around British politics enough to have seen that happen, unfortunately, year after year. 'I want the Prime Minister to have a rest […] all we want to do is make sure that we're addressing these big issues, and that in this summer means making sure we get those security guarantees in Ukraine.'



