The name is “coalition of the predisposed” and the announcement was made by the UK, but a essential partner is missing: the United States. Until then it will serve to give Donald Trump a sign
The United Kingdom announced on Monday “”: a multinational union – with over 30 countries – which will send to up to 30,000 operational ones to maintain lasting peace. At first glance, the idea may seem the necessary solution to the American removal and a Ukraine that seems to be losing a few inches from territory every day, but what will really change?
Azeredo Lopes argues that this “coalition of the predisposed” goes beyond the Ukrainian issue and even the merely logistics or military point of view. The International Relations specialist teacher says he has the “certainty” that this was “an important step taken by those that many considered that they were unable to prepare this type of Ukraine safety guarantee support model.”
“This is a very important signal that we are giving us. That is, in the face of that orphanity that has realized when Donald Trump announced that not only hates the European Union, but apparently does not like the Europeans themselves and considers that we are decaying and outdated. After that, we are capable of starting to work in these dimensions that we have been manifestly disinterested, I think that is a positive aspect, Highlighted, “he explains, noting that Europe has,” in a very surprising way, given steps that are politically very important. “
Keir Strmer, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (EPA)
Were this a diplomatic test and Europe had to go back to the year
“Diplomatically, this is chaos,” says the professor of international relations at Lusíada University, Tiago André Lopes, who disagrees with the political vision of Azeredo Lopes and goes even further: “If this was a diplomacy test, Europe has now disapproved.” The international relations expert points out that the “coalition of predisposed is a hypothetical thing that has a problem: it puts a solution ahead of a project that does not yet exist.”
Tiago André Lopes sums up that what appears to be on the table is “a multinational force for a moment of peace that has not yet been agreed.” “Before we get here, we have to have a ceasefire and an Armistitus project,” he recalls, because “only then, when one tries to impose peace and close the conflict from the political point of view, is a force for stabilization of peace will be necessary.”
“Since this would always be a phase 2. It makes me confusion that Europe is discussing phase 2 when it has no plan for phase 1. In fact, if this were a diplomacy test, Europe was currently disapproved,” says Tiago André Lopes. But even then, there is a detail that seems to have escaped Starmer: “Europe is part of the dispute, directly supported Ukraine and cannot act as a mediator for not having neutral capacity.”
Adding to this discussion is still missing the side and reaction of Russia and, recalls Francisco Pereira Coutinho, Kremlin has said several times “that he did not want international troops from allied states of Ukraine in Ukraine and that this would be considered unacceptable.” The international relations expert says that this position of Russia is difficult to explain, as Ukraine is not “satellite state” of Russia and may decide who wants to have in its territory, and is the target of a war in which it is exercising its right of self -defense.
“Deep down, I think Putin is gaining time. He’s been gaining time in recent years waiting for Donald Trump. Now he may be gaining time to try to understand how far is European support to Ukraine,” says Francisco Pereira Coutinho, remembering that “that’s what it is necessary to show Putin.” “I think Putin is still very skeptical about Europe’s ability to replace the United States.”
The CNN Portugal commentator believes that what Stmerer and Macron are trying to do is “show Putin that Europeans are really talking about this time.” Pereira Coutinho recalls that, about a year ago, when the French president said he did not exclude possibility of sending troops to Ukraine, “everyone was open, amazed,” “It was a statement that was not even interpreted as serious by many people and now, with these successive British initiatives, it has been realized that it is really talking seriously.”
King Carlos III with Macron in Paris, France (EPA)
Disregarding what he wants or does not want Kremlin, Pereira Coutinho recalls that Keir Stmerer has been very incisive in the question that the “predisposed coalition” needs to have a US back stop – “that is, if these troops are attacked, the US will be guaranteed.” In addition, the expert warns that “the costs of such an operation are huge due to the logistical issue to maintain all these military detachments.”
“This coalition signals that in fact Ukraine continues to have allies that are currently showing a level of commitment they have never had over three years. What is still a paradox, because only the time we retract that we truly see the Europeans to give to Ukraine all that they can and even what we could not have could not,”
A peace force is not an “army B”
Tiago André Lopes also identifies a “problem” a priori In the British Epiphany: “It is still just a coalition of intent.” “The United Kingdom speaks of over 30 countries, but we still do not know who they are and we risk being the 27th of the European Union (EU) more some appendages, such as Andorra or St. Marino.” These two examples are not isolated cases, and the international relations expert points out that, for example, Ireland has a military staff below 10,000 men and Montenegro or Iceland do not even have an army. And, he recalls, from the European Union there are at least five countries – Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia and Romania – who have reiterated that they are against and will not send any soldier to Ukraine.
Although the list of countries of this new coalition has not been released, it is known that at a meeting on Saturday representatives of the 27th of the European Union, but also Norway, Australia or New Zealand, and, of course, the United Kingdom.
“What picture is it going to happen? It is not in the EU, it is not in the NATO, who will coordinate the troops? Politically, is an interesting idea, an attempt to show Donald Trump that there is an effort of organization and muscle. But without knowing the details and without knowing who the countries and what kind of capacities are,” asks Tiago André Lopes.
The International Relations expert warns of the risk of “for a multinational force, such as a kind of army B, with huge costs and another dimension”: “This is all very cute now, but if this budget of peace at some time has low human opinions, the cost of public opinions can be high for political leaders who approved these ideas”, and for Tiago André, “Europe is risking to Being a directly involved, complexifying the conflict and making it closer to being regional. ” “Notice the issues that are being asked after what Strmer said, this force seems almost an army B of Ukraine,” he culminates.
Finally, Azeredo Lopes recalls that “Donald Trump, unknowingly, may have made us more to unite than any major statement and any major conference we were involved in.” Now, “the discussion we have systematically avoided, on time, has been absolutely inevitable”: this Monday is the day of a project: a European army.
