Interview
“It is unrealistic to foresee any troop deployment in Ukraine”
On the occasion of an international conference in support of Ukraine which was held on Monday in Paris and which brought together, among others, several European heads of state, the French president announced that he would not rule out sending ground troops in the country to prevent Russia from winning the war, while adding that there was currently no consensus on the subject.
Emmanuel Macron also announced that Europe was going to obtain shells from other countries to help Ukraine, while insisting that today Europe must consider doing without the American aid.
For Ulrich Bounat, geopolitologist, associate researcher at the Open Diplomacy Institute, the French president's remarks are more of a declaratory nature.
French President Emmanuel Macron during the press conference following the international conference aimed at strengthening Western support for Ukraine.
At the Élysée, in Paris, February 26, 2024. AFP - GONZALO FUENTES
By: Romain Lemaresquier Follow
Advertisement
Read more
RFI: The French president announced this Monday that he was not ruling out the idea of sending ground troops to Ukraine. In your opinion, were these purely martial declarations or is Emmanuel Macron really planning to deploy troops
?
Ulrich Bounat:
I think that these statements should not be taken literally in the short term.
It is unrealistic in my opinion, politically and militarily, to plan for any deployment of troops in Ukraine – whether for maintenance or even training on Ukrainian soil.
It seems a little unrealistic to me, quite honestly, in the short or medium term.
I think that the message from the President of the Republic has three objectives.
The first is a message
of extreme firmness towards Vladimir Putin
.
As we have seen in recent weeks, the French president's speech has really strengthened with regard to Russia.
It is very clear, and I think it is an open secret, that Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin hope and count enormously on Western attrition and fatigue to win in Ukraine.
This message is directly addressed to the Kremlin.
It is a message of firmness to tell him that no, precisely, the Westerners are not in the process of giving up, and on the contrary, are ready to even consider extremes, that is to say the sending of troops on the ground to avoid a victory for Russia.
Also read: Emmanuel Macron's comments on sending troops to Ukraine: French details and European reactions
The second point is probably addressed to Ukraine at a time when, particularly on the American side, we can clearly see that aid is being held hostage in some way by political quarrels which have little to do with Ukraine. .
It is also a way of positioning the Europeans and reaffirming the support of the Europeans, even though it costs Ukraine in some way.
And the third point is also to position France.
It is not insignificant if this declaration arrives during a forum being held in Paris.
This is a way for the Head of State to ultimately position France as Ukraine's leading aid partner.
It is also in this sense that the security partnership with Ukraine was signed.
And it is also a way of “
responding to criticism
” that there may have been since February 24, 2022 on the fact that France would perhaps not be as much at the forefront of aid for Ukraine as she wishes.
It is a message which was also perfectly understood and received as such by the countries of Central Europe who, precisely, welcomed this French firmness.
Germany and Poland have already announced that there is no question of deploying troops in Ukraine. Is it not dangerous to make such a speech at a time when European unity, Western unity, is being called into question?
That's always a bit of a problem with this kind of thunderous declaration!
Indeed, on the side of the various NATO countries, first and foremost Germany, but also Italy and Spain, we are absolutely not considering the deployment of troops there.
Because they consider this step as an escalation towards Russia.
So, indeed, there is a risk that this kind of “
slightly martial
” declaration will offend certain capitals.
But I think there's probably going to be some clarification.
We know that following this meeting which was held this Monday, February 26 in Paris, the Ministers of Defense will meet in the next two or three weeks to put a little more into application the main directives which were given by the heads of government.
But on the other hand, in my opinion, this type of extremely firm declaration – I am not talking here about a sending of troops, I am talking possibly about massive military aid from France to Ukraine or even from Europe – if they are not followed up with real effects, it risks coming across a bit like a martial declaration with no future.
Which would ultimately only reinforce Vladimir Putin's conviction that Westerners talk a lot and that when it comes to acting, they no longer do much.
Emmanuel Macron also spoke of looking for shells and ammunition elsewhere. Is this a question of putting pressure on the countries of the European Union (EU) which are struggling to produce them or will Europe actually try to find these shells elsewhere?
I think there's a bit of both.
There is the fact, as I said, on the French side, of positioning itself a little at the forefront in Europe and therefore effectively putting a little pressure on the European partners so that they produce more.
The problem with this kind of posture is that even we in France only produce a few thousand shells per month.
Which represents one day of shooting on the Ukrainian side.
There is an industrial constraint which means that the Europeans will not be able to supply the million shells that they have committed to supply.
Moreover, concerning these million shells, it was already planned that around 20 to 30% would be purchased abroad.
Due to European industrial limits, we will have to buy abroad, that is obvious.
Buying in South Korea is very likely.
The Americans have done something like that too.
We know that Germany is starting to discuss with India to possibly buy shells.
The Czech president also spoke of speaking to Turkey and South Africa.
For South Africa, this is unlikely since we can clearly see that the country is trying to remain as neutral as possible in relation to the war in Ukraine.
But on the other hand, going to get shells from South Korea, Turkey or India, these are indeed options that could be considered and which would allow Westerners, and particularly Europeans, to keep their promises, without having to bear the cost. industrial that this would imply, that is to say opening new factories for the production of shells, etc.
If the Europeans decide to produce a million shells per year, this will not be possible for at least two or three years due to industrial constraints, the time to set up the assembly lines.
So, it is more likely that to try to respond to the problems of ammunition rationing on the Ukrainian side – and as long as the Americans are stuck on the envelope in Congress – the Europeans are trying to stock up on as many supplies as possible. buying in India or South Korea.
Emmanuel Macron also said this Monday that the European Union no longer needs the United States. Is this really the case? Is Europe able to guarantee its own security knowing that the European defense file is still in its infancy?
I completely agree with you.
There is an awareness among Europeans, particularly following Donald Trump's latest statements, when he said that he would give carte blanche to the Russians to do what he wanted on countries that were not devoting enough percentage of their GDP to defense.
There is an awareness on the European side, it must be recognized.
There are discussions that were unthinkable just a few years ago, particularly in Germany, on the question of the American nuclear umbrella, and why not even possible French participation.
There is real strategic thinking on what the defense partnership with the United States means, and how it would be possible to have something complementary or different with Europe, and in particular with France's nuclear umbrella. .
However, we are really in the early stages of discussion.
Currently, no one, and not even France, with the few hundred nuclear warheads it has, would be capable of truly defending Europe.
We have to be realistic, we do not have at all the same capabilities as the Americans from every point of view, and even from a nuclear point of view.
And so indeed, if this reflection were ever to be completed, I think that it would still require fairly long discussions between France and all the countries of Europe.
Defense Europe is a sea serpent that does not have the same meaning depending on the country.
Perhaps it is more about having a more practical approach to try to have real discussions about, for example, what European countries close to Russia could possibly expect from countries more to the West, and in particular France which, in this context, has a fundamental role to play since it is a nuclear power?
How can we provide security guarantees to these different countries in a truly practical way, and not just remain declarative by saying that Europeans no longer need the United States?
I think that's not true, and it won't be true in the next few years.
Even if the role of the Americans will probably be reduced in Europe, whether Donald Trump wins or not, it is not tomorrow that the French, even with the help of the English, will manage to replace the entire industrial partnership and the entire partnership of defense, particularly from an atomic point of view, constituted by the United States with most of the countries of Central Europe.
► Ulrich Bounat is author of
Hybrid war in Ukraine, what perspectives?
, Cygne editions.
Read alsoConference in support of Ukraine organized in Paris: “Russia wants to destabilize us”
Newsletter
Receive all the international news directly in your inbox
I subscribe
Follow all the international news by downloading the RFI application
Share :
Continue reading on the same themes:
France
Ukraine
Russia
Emmanuel Macron
Vladimir Poutine
Volodymyr Zelensky
Defense