Peacekeeping forces for Ukraine: are real security guarantees possible?
Kyiv • UNN
Political scientist Stanislav Zhelikhovsky explained what peacekeeping forces would mean for Ukraine and how effective they would be. He emphasized that it is fundamentally important for Kyiv not to be left alone with Russia in the post-war period.
The issue of security guarantees for Ukraine in the event of a cessation of hostilities remains open and controversial. Political scientist Stanislav Zhelikhovsky told UNN journalist what peacekeeping forces would mean for Ukraine and how effective they would be.
After the leaders' summit in Paris, the topic of security guarantees for Ukraine once again became the focus of international discussions. Western partners are talking about political and legal obligations that could be activated after a ceasefire, but there is still a lack of specifics. According to the expert, it is fundamentally important for Kyiv not to be left alone with Russia in the post-war period.
For Ukraine, the key is that it does not find itself alone after the end of hostilities. This refers to the ability to strengthen its defense capabilities and have deterrence tools in the event of renewed aggression. But for now, everything is at the level of consultations, meetings, and negotiations.
He emphasizes that the Paris Declaration, signed by the leaders of the coalition of the willing, is more of a framework document. The document contains political and legal obligations, but does not answer the question of how exactly they will work in practice. Without clear mechanisms and guarantees of implementation, such agreements remain vulnerable.
The declaration contains many correct formulations, but this is still a general theoretical dimension. We do not see a clear concept that would explain how these guarantees will be implemented. Without agreements with Russia, most of these provisions may never work.
Stanislav Zhelikhovsky pays special attention to the position of the United States of America, which did not sign the Paris Declaration.
The fact that the US did not sign the declaration is a serious signal. This may mean that Washington does not want to take on obligations that cannot be implemented. It is possible that the American side is consulting with Moscow and taking its position into account.
Another controversial issue remains the possibility of deploying a peacekeeping mission without Russia's consent. Formally, such mechanisms exist, the expert says, but in real conditions, everything depends on the content of a potential peace agreement.
If the agreement stipulates a ban on the deployment of Western military formations, any such mission will automatically be considered a violation of the agreements. Moscow will be able to declare that Ukraine and its partners have violated the signed agreements and use this as a pretext for escalation.
The political scientist also doubts that Ukraine will be able to count on full-fledged peacekeeping missions with a combat mandate, similar to those deployed in Kosovo or Afghanistan. According to him, at most, monitoring or limited armed missions without real levers of influence could be created.
I don't think we will see missions with a combat mandate in Ukraine. At best, it will be monitoring of the ceasefire or a symbolic presence that will not be able to really deter Russia.
Stanislav Zhelikhovsky says that the main and most reliable security guarantee for Ukraine remains its own Armed Forces. Western aid can play an important role, but it cannot completely replace the state's internal military capability.
The most effective security guarantee is a strong Ukrainian army. If, after the active phase of the war, Ukraine maintains powerful Armed Forces, the support of partners, and a course towards European integration, this will be much more reliable than any declarations.