The British Army may be too small to help keep peace in Ukraine after the current war ends, Sir Keir Starmer has been warned as he discussed the idea with Volodymyr Zelensky.
The Prime Minister visited Kyiv on Thursday and held talks with Ukraine’s President about how the UK can guarantee the country’s security in future.
Starmer has previously spoken to Emmanuel Macron about the prospect of a Franco-British joint force keeping the peace in Ukraine once the war is over, to prevent a repeat of Russian aggression.
But British officials have played down the prospect of any imminent decision given the uncertainty over how and when the conflict might end.
Zelensky said it was “a bit too early to talk about details” at a joint press conference in Kyiv, while Starmer refused to commit to a peacekeeping force but promised that “we will work with you and all of our allies on steps that would be robust enough to guarantee Ukraine’s security”.
The Prime Minister added: “We are with you not just today or tomorrow, for this year or the next, but for 100 years long after this terrible war is over and Ukraine is free and thriving once again.”
Asked later by Sky News whether he was ready to send the British military to Ukraine, Starmer replied: “I don’t want to get ahead of ourselves, but I have indicated that we will play our full part. Because this isn’t just about sovereignty in Ukraine.
“It’s about what the impact is back in the United Kingdom and our values, our freedom, our democracy. Because if Russia succeeds in this aggression, it will impact all of us for a very, very long time.”
Former leading military officers warned that the UK’s Armed Forces would struggle to deploy the thousands of troops required to keep the peace in Ukraine.
Richard Dannatt, former head of the Army, said that 5,000-10,000 soldiers would be needed to safeguard Ukrainian and Russian borders, as well as the Royal Navy patrolling the Black Sea and the RAF policing the skies providing reconnaissance and air cover.
He told The i Paper: “I don’t think the size of our Army is large enough to do that with everything else that it’s doing currently. I think we would struggle.
“We could do it, but then we would have to certainly put more resources into the Army, and set about growing the size of the Army. It’s a major issue that relates directly to the future size of the British Army. You start to run out of troops quite quickly.”
Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former tank commander who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and officer for 23 years, said any peacekeeping mission would place “huge amount” of pressure on the budget of the Ministry of Defence.
He added: “We have such a small Army, we’ve taken so much risk with defence, that if we did this, we would be able to do nothing else. At the worst case, it’s the whole of the British military being involved. The least worst case, it’s providing some command and control of a brigade of tanks and infantry.”
How peacekeeping mission could work
Up to 10,000 British soldiers could be deployed to Ukraine as part of any multinational peacekeeping force, former army chiefs believe.
The RAF would be needed to police the skies while the Royal Navy could be scrambled to patrol the Black Sea, according to Richard Dannatt, ex-head of the British Army, and Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former army colonel.
A British Army contingent could make up around 10-15 per cent of an allied coalition force, with tanks and artillery part of any battle group deployment.
Committing 5,000 British troops to Ukraine would mean another four brigades training to take over a six-month tour, putting the total number of soldiers involved at 25,000.
Millions of landmines scattered around Ukraine would be among risks facing troops, with the potential for a peacekeeping deployment to last decades, as with Cyprus or Northern Ireland.
Western officials attempted to play down the prospect of an international peacekeeping force being announced imminently, describing it as a “hypothetical situation down the line” and suggesting it was not one that would be discussed in public.
Allied countries were focused on “putting Ukraine in the strongest possible position” and “there is no sign at the moment or the Russians coming to the table”, one official said.
The focus in 2025 and beyond that was making sure Ukraine was in the “strongest possible position”, they added. The strongest possible position would mean Ukraine being able to impose very heavy costs on Russia, as it is doing so currently, stopping further Russian advances and being able to sustain that for as long as necessary in materiel, manpower and finance, the officials said.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Army ‘too small’ to play significant peacekeeping role in Ukraine )
Also on site :
- Naukri exposed recruiter email addresses, researcher says
- Macy’s Has a 'Very Soft' 2-Pack Pillow Set for 50% Off, and Shoppers Say It Gave Them a 'Restful Night’s Sleep'
- Barbra Streisand Sends Bold Message to Helen Mirren After Her Cannes Appearance