What NATO Country Doesn’t Have Troops in Ukraine?
European discussions about sending troops obscures the
fact that several NATO countries already have boots on the ground.
Mar 11, 2024
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/what-nato-country-doesnt-have-troops-in-ukraine/
The war in Ukraine has reached that long-feared fork in
the road. Ukraine is losing the war, and no amount of arms or aid is going to
change that. The West has to either accept that assessment and nudge Ukraine to
the negotiating table or send more than arms and aid. It is going to have to
escalate its support and send troops, risking direct confrontation with Russia
and the disaster scenario it has tried to avoid since the first days of the
war.
This realization has sparked a bitter debate in
Europe. Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico said on February 26 that “a number of NATO and EU
member states are considering that they will send their troops to Ukraine on a
bilateral basis.” That same day, the French President Emmanuel Macron said that, though “there is no consensus today to
send troops on the ground in an official, accepted, and endorsed manner...no
option should be discarded.”
Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz shot back that the consensus was “that there will be no
ground troops, no soldiers on Ukrainian soil who are sent there by European
states or NATO states.” Germany, Poland, Sweden, Spain, Italy, the Czech
Republic, and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg all said there was no plan to send troops to
Ukraine.
Macron replied that the time has come for a “Europe where it
will be appropriate not to be a coward.” The German Defense Minister Boris
Pistorius said that “talk about boots on the ground or having
more courage or less courage...does not really help solve the issues we have
when it comes to helping Ukraine.”
The debate over sending NATO troops to Ukraine may be
masking the need for more immediate debate about NATO troops already on the
ground in Ukraine.
The transcript of an intercepted February 19 conversation
between senior German air force officials discussing the possible transfer of
German Taurus long-range missiles to Ukraine says that the Germans “know how
the English do it.... They have several people on-site.” The revelation that
the UK has troops on the ground has now been confirmed by the British Prime Minister’s office: “Beyond
the small number of personnel we do have in the country supporting the armed
forces of Ukraine, we haven't got any plans for large-scale deployment.”
The transcript says that “the French don’t do it that
way,” but Scholz has hinted that they do. On February 26, the German Chancellor
defended his decision not to send Taurus missiles to Ukraine by saying that it would require the presence of Germans in
Ukraine to match their British and French counterparts. He explained, “What is being done in the way of target control and
accompanying target control on the part of the British and the French can’t be
done in Germany.” He worried that “a participation in the war could emerge from
what we do.”
The transcript also cryptically alludes to an American
presence on the ground. Wondering whether Ukraine would be able to do targeting
on their own, one of the officials says, “It's known that there are numerous
people there in civilian attire who speak with an American accent.”
And there are numerous American civilian officers in
Ukraine. On February 26, a New York Times report revealed in greater detail than ever before the
extent of CIA involvement on the ground in Ukraine. In the days before the war
began, U.S. personnel were evacuated from Ukraine—except for a small group of
CIA officers whom CIA Director William Burns ordered be left behind, and the
“scores of new officers” who were sent in “to help the Ukrainians.” They helped
them by passing on critical information, “including where Russia was planning
strikes and which weapons systems they would use.” The CIA officers provided
“intelligence for targeted missile strikes.” And they provided “intelligence
support for lethal operations against Russian forces on Ukrainian soil.”
These recent intercepts and reports suggest that the
U.S., UK, and France already have troops or operatives on the ground in
Ukraine. Russia has long claimed the presence of a large number of Polish
fighters in Ukraine.
Other NATO
countries appear open to such direct involvement. Estonia’s Prime Minister Kaja Kallas said that
“everything” is on the table when it comes to helping Ukraine, that “I think it
is also the signals that we are sending to Russia, that we are not ruling out
different things.” Referring to Macron’s comments that sending troops to
Ukraine should be an option that is not discarded, the Lithuanian Foreign
Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis agreed that “nothing can be taken off the table, no
option can be rejected out of hand,” adding that “I very much welcome and
encourage the discussion that has started.”
And other NATO countries are considering sending
troops to Ukraine in noncombatant roles. The Czech President Petr Pavel says that Ukraine’s Western partners should “not
limit ourselves where we don't have to,” including potentially sending troops
for “non-combat engagement” like training missions.
Canada’s Defense Minister Bill Blair says that Canada already has a small military
presence in Ukraine to protect diplomatic staff (though it had been reported that Canada evacuated its diplomats at the start
of the war). He says that Canada has “no plans to deploy combat troops” to
Ukraine, but that some Canadian training of Ukrainian troops has been
“challenging because it’s difficult to get people out of Ukraine to do the
training.” So, he says, there was “discussions that, could we do it more
efficiently, and is it possible to do it in Ukraine?”
The West has arrived at a fearful dilemma. Doubling
down and sending troops to fight in Ukraine is a dangerous option that could
lead to direct confrontation with Russia and an unthinkable war. But it is not
the only road that can be taken. The West can also turn off the path of war
that has benefitted no one, not send troops to Ukraine and, instead, explore
the diplomatic road.
Ted Snider
Ted Snider is a columnist on U.S. foreign
policy and history at Antiwar.com. He is also a frequent contributor to
Responsible Statecraft as well as other outlets.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario