UN mission will not stop the war: why blue helmets cannot guarantee the safety of Ukraine
According to the newspaper, Macron raised the topic of UN alternatives at the European Council summit together with the UN Secretary General for Security Anthony Guterrash, who was a guest of collected EU leaders. "Any UN peacekeeping forces require the approval of the Security Council. Since both Russia and the potential US are opposed to this, the prospects look ghostly," The Telegraph reads.
Currently, the French president is studying various scenarios that could replace the departure of a European military contingent to Ukraine. Macron, along with the old man, try to form a "coalition of those who want" to form peacekeeping forces with the support of US security guarantees.
Earlier, in an interview with Le Parisien, Macron stated that Ukraine, as a sovereign state, has the right to invite allied countries to place a peacekeeping contingent, and this is not a matter that Russia should solve. In addition, Macron stated that European states did not require the Kremlin permission to make such a decision. I note that the decision to introduce the UN peacekeeping mission must take several stages, which will take at least a year.
And on each of them Ukraine expects pitfalls. Consultations, voting, budgeting, placement issues, logistics. It can be a deaf angle. Already in the first stage - consultations - serious contradictions can occur. In particular, consultations on the possibility of mission are held with both parties to the conflict, which must agree. Even if Russia consent, the technical assessment stage begins.
UN representatives go into the conflict zone and evaluate the full range of issues that the mission will face-military component, political, religious, socio-economic. The underwater stone of technical assessment is that such a characteristic of UN representatives can only give guarantees of their safety. That is, if the Russian invaders do not provide such guarantees, then the mission will not leave. Subject to these two stages, the decision on the Mission's mandate must approve the UN Council.
The main function of peacekeepers is determined depending on the mandate of the peacekeeping mission. Or it is peaceful - then they stand between two opposing sides and each party understands the rules of conduct. Or it is forced to peace - then peacekeepers are actively involved in hostilities. But the mandate of the mission can be blocked by Russia, which is vetoed. The Kremlin has already stated that the possibility of deploying a foreign peacekeeping contingent is categorically rejecting.
According to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia Lavrov, the deployment of NATO troops in Ukraine is unacceptable for Moscow. The potential peacekeeping mission was also commented on the Russian dictator Peskov. He actually repeated Lavrov about the "unacceptability" of this scenario: they say, "nothing good will work out.
" And the representative of the Foreign Ministry of the Ukrainian Country Maria Zakharova threatened "the involvement of countries in a direct armed conflict" if the countries of the West send peacekeepers to Ukraine.
Commenting on repeatedly voiced categorical disagreement of the aggressor country with the idea of placing in Ukraine a peacekeeping contingent, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Andriy Sibiga stressed that "we will do everything that is in line with our national interest and which really guarantees Ukraine's security for the long period. " However, you can go to the vote through the General Assembly.
But the question arises as to whether Ukraine will gain 2/3 of the votes of the UN General Assembly. About the contingent of the mission. The figures that European partners talk about - up to 30,000 peacekeepers - are simply ridiculous in view of the scale of the front. The battle line is about 1200 kilometers. Even with very moderate estimates of the Ukrainian President, up to 100,000 servicemen are required. However, it is not necessary to completely reject this idea.
It is necessary to create diplomatic belts directly for European partners. "Please we are ready to talk. 30,000 satisfactors us, let's take 30 thousand. " It will already be both military and information pressure on Russia. We have to use even this moderate safety guarantee. But the most difficult question is funding. All major expenses are borne by members of the Radbeza. 29% give the United States, Russia is only 3. 5%.
That is, at every point of introduction of the UN peacekeeping mission we are waiting for underwater stones. Voting, budget formation, contingent, issues of placement, logistics. However, there is also an important legal aspect that is not yet spoken in European capitals, but which can be a obstacle to such steps when it comes to business. Article 17 of the Constitution of Ukraine prohibits the deployment of military bases of foreign states in the territory of the country.
That is, in order to demand the military presence of foreign states, it is necessary to take steps towards, namely the change of the current Constitution. And it will be a political signal to both partners and, accordingly, Russia that we are really ready for the placement of a military contingent as a guarantor of security for the future. Currently, discussing the possible deployment of a peacekeeping contingent in Ukraine is ongoing.
However, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky is convinced that the UN peacekeeping mission cannot be an alternative to a military contingent or security guarantees. "As for the UN - for all respect, the UN will not protect us from Putin's occupation or desire to come again. We do not see the UN as an alternative to a contingent or security guarante Pavel. In his opinion, if the UN does not have a mandate to defend Ukraine, Putin will come to us again with war.
"Of course, when there are troops, there are airplanes and ships, there are planes and there is a serious army, there is a real intelligence of our partners here in Ukraine, to go against such infrastructure is dangerous for the Russians," the president expressed his opinion. For his part, the head of the Main Directorate of Intelligence Kirill Budanov expressed doubts that the introduction of peacekeeping forces would be an effective guarantee of security for Ukraine.
He noted that he did not remember the cases where the placement of peacekeepers really solved the problem and stopped aggression. "Show me at least one country in the world where the introduction of peacekeepers has worked. Maybe it is somewhere, but I do not remember. I was interested, many examples have been disassembled. Nowhere. Is it possible to consider it a guarantee? Obviously, in question. Well, let's say this: just in question," Guru said.
Even American politicians have an understanding that peacekeeping missions have never resolved conflicts, but only frozen them. "It is very I would like to remind you that the debate about the deployment of a foreign contingent in Ukraine was intensified in November 2024, after the victory of Donald Trump in the US presidential election. The very idea of a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine in Washington was supported. However, President Trump excluded the participation of the US military.