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
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
UK military chief meets US counterparts for Ukraine talks
The head of Britain's armed forces has met with his Nato counterparts as Europe continues to push for security guarantees for Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire. Admiral Sir Tony Radakin met senior US defence officials alongside other European military chiefs in Washington DC on Wednesday to discuss military options to secure peace in Ukraine. He later attended a virtual meeting of Nato's military committee, described by its chairman Italian Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone as 'candid'. On Tuesday evening, Admiral Radakin, the chief of the defence staff, had dined with his US counterpart General Dan Caine. The meetings come amid renewed planning for a 'coalition of the willing', led by the UK and France, that would guarantee Kyiv's security in the event of a ceasefire. Earlier in the week, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron co-chaired a meeting of the coalition, in which members of the group also discussed the possibility of further sanctions on Russia. Western security guarantees, strongly resisted by Moscow, are one of the central issues for any peace deal for Ukraine, which fears Russia could otherwise use a ceasefire to regroup and launch a renewed invasion. So far, only the UK and France have indicated they could commit troops to a peacekeeping force in Ukraine. In an interview on Tuesday Donald Trump ruled out an American ground contribution but suggested the US could be willing to provide some form of air support. His special envoy, Steve Witkoff, had earlier suggested the US could offer Ukraine a mutual defence agreement similar to Nato's Article 5, without Kyiv formally joining the alliance. Renewed talks among the 'coalition of the willing' follow last week's summit between Mr Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska as the US president continued to push for an end to a conflict he had promised he could finish on his first day in office. Those talks appeared to result in little progress towards a deal, but sparked concern among some in Europe that Mr Trump could seek to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into accepting a deal without sufficient security guarantees. On Monday, Sir Keir and Mr Macron joined other European leaders in travelling to Washington in a show of support for Mr Zelensky during a meeting with Mr Trump. Meanwhile, the UK and Russia traded sanctions as London sought to increase the pressure on Moscow to end its invasion. Europe minister Stephen Doughty unveiled sanctions on a series of organisations linked to Kyrgyzstan's financial services sector, saying they had been involved in Kremlin attempts to 'soften the blow of our sanctions by laundering transactions through dodgy crypto networks'. Russia in turn sanctioned 21 individuals, including former Labour MP Denis MacShane, several journalists, and the Government-appointed independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall.
The Sun
29 minutes ago
- The Sun
Epping's win over asylum hotel is glorious but I know where they'll put evicted migrants & it's bad news for some Brits
SHAZAAM! And in one glorious moment, the government's asylum seeker policies lay in complete ruins. Now, they are in BIG trouble. I say a glorious moment — and it is. For years it has quietly infuriated the ordinary people of England that asylum seekers are housed at our expense in hotels. 8 8 8 And even in some cases get gym membership, or hair extensions! And come down every morning to a full English. While you are pouring milk on your last Weetabix and wondering how to feed the kids. It's no use the lefties howling. 'No, no, it's not like that at all! And in any case most of the migrants go for the continental breakfast option. You know, croissants and stuff.' It is EXACTLY like that, as we have seen. Not to mention the stress on local communities who suddenly get a whole bunch of young men from a different culture dumped on them. Not all of the young men being as nice as pie. Anyway, Epping — where the residents protested about migrants in a local hotel — has won its court battle. As a result there will be no more migrants staying in that hotel. Victory! And now lots of other councils have followed suit. They too will be kicking out the illegals. The government is absolutely spitting feathers. The problem now, then, is where are these migrants to go. My suggestion last week was tents. Or South Georgia. Or Rockall. But the Government won't buy that idea, sadly. And this is where we need to watch them very carefully. To see what they come up with. Because it's largely in the south that migrants are held in hotels. In the north of England, because of cheap property prices, they tend to be housed in what are called Houses in Multiple Occupation. 16 arrested after protests outside Epping migrant hotel as ring of steel ramps up around TWO asylum seeker centres And so with the hotel option being closed down, it may be that the Government decides to swamp the north of England with migrants. Because it can do so cheaply. It may think (being pretty stupid) that is the only option. The local councils in the north need to shout out a big fat NO to that notion. These are the areas of the UK that already have the biggest social problems. They are also our poorest regions. The last thing these communities want or need is for boatload after boatload of asylum seekers to be dumped on their doorsteps. I think we can trust the councils run by Reform UK to oppose this idea completely. And so the Government will expect the Labour-run councils to help them out. And that means more and more problems for the Government. Because the voters will see that its Reform which says no to housing illegal asylum seekers. And the Labour Party which says yes. And that will be another few hundred thousand votes lost to Sir Keir Starmer at the next election. In the meantime, we might hope that this all sharpens the Government's concentration a little. And that they step up with more measures to stop the asylum seekers arriving here in the first place. As I said last week, a law that says anyone who tries to come here illegally will be barred from ever being allowed to stay would be the first thing to do. But I bet Labour doesn't have the gonads to do it. YES, inflation is up again. Almost double the Bank of England 's target rate. That means no reduction in interest rates. And further down the line, another cash crisis for the poorest of us. Is there any section of the economy Labour hasn't hurt? GET SET FOR AN EXODUS 8 RACHEL Reeves ' next plan to bankrupt everybody in the country is to put a tax on our homes. Don't forget, we've already been taxed on the money we spent on our homes. Now it is reported that she wants a property tax. But only at the more expensive end of the market. Anything that seems aspirational, anything that rewards hard work – the Chancellor will tax it. Soon we'll be left with a country full of skanks. Because everybody who works hard and saves dosh will have fled. DANGER DOLPHIN A DOLPHIN called Reggie has been attacking women off the Dorset coast. Especially if he sees that they are wearing a wetsuit. He swims up to them and seemingly tries to push their heads under water by jumping on their backs. I suspect it's because he's bored stiff with them making awe-stricken 'oohs' and 'ahhs' whenever he hoves into view. And taking selfies. He's basically saying: 'Go on, shove this on WhatsApp, you ditzy cow.' PANTS FOR PC VICTIM WHILE searching through Lea-Ann Sullivan's bedroom drawer, a copper found a pair of her knickers and quickly put them in his back pocket. The policeman, Marcin Zielinski, resigned from the force and has since been sent to prison. Lea-Ann is not happy, though. She said she is constantly thinking: 'What did he want them for? Why did he take them? What's he going to do with them? How many more people has he done it to?' Well, I could give Lea-Ann the answer to some of those questions. All but the last one, in fact. It is not recorded if PC Perv was allowed to keep the knickers. NAIVE ZOE SO WRONG 8 THERE was a woman on the BBC Newsnight programme who showed exactly why asylum seekers have become such a problem. She was called Zoe Gardner. Probably still is. And she thought the protests against the asylum seekers had been organised by ' Nazis and fascists'. She said a solution to the problem would be to build 'not for profit' homes for ALL of the asylum seekers. And that none of them were 'illegal'. She had a grasp of the subject you might have expected in a reasonably responsive four-year-old child. An absolute halfwit. Naive and hating of her own countrymen. And absolutely certain she was right. KEEP IT FIT FOR MOOR THE Government is proposing to ban the winter burning of heather moorland. Good. Come February the moors near me resemble a warzone. All of this activity to protect one bird – the grouse. The Moorland Association, which represents landowners, says the Government should think again. Controlled burning prevents wildfires, the association says. What rubbish. In fact, the so-called controlled burning can lead to wildfires itself, according to the RSPB. We need to reform the grouse moors. And make them fit habitats for a vast array of wildlife, not just grouse. TWISTS ON THE BORING NAME OLIVER 8 8 OK, so the most popular name for baby boys in the UK is Muhammad. But Oliver is high up on the list too. In fact, everywhere I looked in the country, Oliver was coming out near the top. I think I marginally prefer Muhammad, no offence. Know what the most popular girl's name was? Olivia. Have we lost our imaginations? We'll soon be an entire nation of Olivers and Olivias. If you're about to pup, here are a few suggestions for racy alternatives to Oliver and Olivia, with a bit of back history so you can explain the reasoning to rellies. Sputnik – to commemorate the first satellite. Gnasher – to commemorate Dennis the Menace's dog. PraiseGod Barebones – to commemorate a roundhead politician from the 17th century. Reeves – in homage to our brilliant Chancellor. Bakelite – to honour the first commercially available plastic. Nebuchadnezzar – after the Babylonian king. Ngerulmud – 'because she was conceived when we were on holiday on Palau. It's the capital, you know.'
The Sun
29 minutes ago
- The Sun
Labour want to use you & your home as cash cows – so council spending can keep spiralling and migrants can keep coming
NO one can say that this government is short of ideas. It is just that every single one of them involves one thing: How to extract even more of our money. 3 3 This week alone has seen a bewildering number of proposals dangled before us, many of which revolve around using our homes as cash cows. One day we learned that Rachel Reeves is considering replacing stamp duty and council tax with a new property tax which would be levied annually on our homes, proportionate to their current value. Then it turned out that actually this new tax wouldn't necessarily mean abolishing council tax — it would run alongside it, raising money from any home sold for more than £500,000. If fact, it transpired that we could face rising council tax bills. Angela Rayner reportedly wants them ratcheted up in more prosperous areas in order to subsidise poorer ones. Then came another suggestion: That higher-value homes might lose their exemption from capital gains tax. It could mean anyone selling a family home having to pay 24 per cent of the profit they have made on their property since they bought it, possibly decades ago. The Chancellor seems to have it in her head that Britain is in the midst of a housing crisis caused by greedy Baby Boomers — those born between the mid- 1940s and 1960s. They have monopolised the housing stock, and therefore she is justified in milking them for all they are worth. It is the same mentality that saw the Bolsheviks blaming the middle classes for every ill and sending them off to the gulags after the Russian Revolution. Is Labour's National Insurance hike a tax on working people? Last year's Budget already meted out punishment for buy to let investors, who were whacked with a two per cent rise in stamp duty. Now Reeves is coming for owner-occupiers too. But it shouldn't take her too much to realise that her proposals would make the housing crisis even worse. If you levy CGT on the sales of family homes, it will act as a huge disincentive for people to sell up and downsize. Why bother, when much of the capital you hoped to release would be gobbled up by the taxman? Punitive taxes on property ownership are just a wealth tax by another name, but they would hit millions of pensioners who are asset-rich but cash-poor. Just because a house has rocketed in value since it was bought in the 1970s doesn't mean that its owner feels wealthy. It is still the same house, whatever it is worth. The real reason for the housing crisis is low rates of house building combined with high rates of migration. 'PUNISHING HOMEOWNERS' When you are building fewer than 200,000 new homes a year but allowing the population to swell by 700,000 a year, it is a recipe for acute shortage. You can't solve that by punishing homeowners. As for council tax, Reeves seems to think that homeowners are getting a free ride. True, it is wrong that in one case a £36million mansion in Kensington was found to have a lower council tax bill than a flat out near Heathrow airport. But overall, council taxpayers have been stung in recent years. According to the Taxpayers' Alliance, the average bill rose by 79 per cent in real terms, ie adjusted for inflation, between 1993/94 and 2023/24. The odd absurdity in the council tax system should not be used as an excuse to push up bills for millions of homeowners. Over the years we have faced higher and higher bills for an ever-lousier service. The more we pay, the more our bins seem to go unemptied and deeper the potholes on our streets. Councils like to blame rising social care costs for their poor finances, but that is only part of the story. 3 Other important factors are poor investments in commercial property made by many councils, and the soaring cost of over-generous local government pension schemes. Freedom of information requests to 300 councils last year revealed that a quarter of what we pay in council tax is disappearing straight into council workers' pension funds. In one case, Basingstoke and Deane Council was found to be paying more into staff pensions than it was raising in council tax. Another reason we are paying more but getting less is lousy productivity. Astonishingly, some councils think the way to right this is to move workers to a four-day week — which they foolishly think will magically lead to them producing more. I have a better idea. Shift unproductive workers on to a zero-hour week. That might just help encourage the rest to put in a bit more effort. 'FLAPPING AROUND' The Government is flapping around for ways of raising extra revenue because Labour backbenchers have made it impossible to cut public spending. Reeves' plan to trim a modest £5billion from the benefits bill was quickly reversed when Keir Starmer realised he could suffer the humiliation of a Commons defeat. That has put an end to Reeves' efforts to balance the books with a combination of spending cuts as well as tax rises. Now, we are just getting the tax rises instead. We are being hammered because Labour MPs refuse to believe there is any such thing as wasteful public spending. Sadly, there is — and it permeates every area of government. But clearly the current government isn't going to do anything about it.
