European Policy Analysis Centre (CEPA) – founded in 1983 in Washington, D.C., with offices in London and Brussels think tank, which acts to "ensure a strong and democratic transatlantic alliance", demands the immediate creation of European defence forces. They are, according to analysts, needed to aid Ukraine.
Ben Hodges, Alexander Crowther and Jahara "Franky" Matisek, in a joint appeal on the 4th of March on the CEPA website, writes that "the leaders of the continent must act decisively to prevent the evil peace that could undermine Ukraine's sovereignty, dare Russia and endanger NATO allies".
Hodges is simply a erstwhile U.S. Army officer who commanded in the US and Europe. Crowther is an older non-residential academic at the Transatlantic defence and safety Program at the Center for European Policy Analysis, prof. of cyber practice at Florida global University. He besides conducts investigation for Swedish defence University. He was, among others, a peculiar assistant to the Chief Alliance Commander in Europe (SACEUR) and a elder polytologist at RAND Corporation. He specializes in NATO and European politics and cybernetic, strategy and unconventional forms of competition. Matisek, on the another hand, is simply a lieutenant colonel, a military prof. associated with the US Naval War College, a associate of the Non-Resident Fellow of 2023 at the Irregular Warfare Initiative (a joint initiative of Princeton’s Empirical Studies of Conflict task and Modern War Institute West Point) and investigator Minerva in the U.S. Department of Defense. Author of more than 80 articles and essays in peer reviewed journals and publications on strategies, war and safety assistance. He served in Afghanistan and taught, among others, at the Military and strategical Studies Department at the US Air Force Academy.
It can be said that 3 authors of experts close to military, for years giving advice to EU institutions, utilizing EU grants suggested that direct US negotiations with Moscow, at the same time criticizing Ukraine and even protecting Russia in the UN indicate that "the US is pushing its European allies aside".
So what should Europe do? The military insists on the immediate deployment of European states' troops to Ukraine, even without the United States military support, to guarantee Kiev's safety and change the negotiating regime.
Analysts want Europeans to mobilise their forces immediately, increase military readiness and investment in weapons and ammunition. They fear that any hesitation in this respect will only dare Russia. In their opinion, this has always been the case in the past.
"If European leaders neglect to act, the Trump administration's negotiations with Moscow could jeopardise Ukraine's sovereignty and Europe's long-term security," they say.
The authors of the text point to a change in Trump's attitude towards Russia, praising last year's proposals by the president of France to send European forces to Ukraine, as well as the "readyness" of UK Prime Minister Keira Starmer to send alleged safety forces.
Analysts indicate that the first opposition of Germany and the uncertainty of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk about sending straight Polish soldiers to Ukraine – although offering logistical and political support – must be broken in the current situation.
It is no longer adequate to train Ukrainian forces through the European Union Military Support Mission (EUMAM) and initiatives led by Britain. There are besides insufficient possible 30 000 EU multinational peacekeeping forces to hit Ukraine to keep the stableness of any ceasefire agreement.
European leaders would give guarantees of Ukrainian sovereignty and safety only through strong military presence. Otherwise Russia will break further agreements, specified as Minsk I and Minsk II.
The military postulates the sending of forces of all kind, providing air, land and sea forces, intelligence, reflection and exploratory platforms (ISRs), as well as crucial defence measures against electronic warfare.
‘Some of these options would usually be guaranteed by the United States, but given the current circumstances, Europe must be prepared to make these resources due to the fact that it can no longer trust entirely on US support against Russia," we read.
The military adds that the United States could possibly supply "part but not all of the support that Europe needs" and "France and the United Kingdom in peculiar would be in the best position to gather safety forces in the form of Reinforced Stabilization Forces in Ukraine (ESF-U)".
Europeans must besides lay down the principles of engagement.
Analysts indicate that "the possible ESF-U should include 5 armoured and mechanized brigades supported by a drone unit, storm helicopters, transport aircraft and fighters". These forces would deter and "support Ukrainian troops along a demilitarised line of contact, minimizing direct Russian provocations and at the same time signaling the European readiness to take on the burden of defending Europe, with or without America".
The EU should supply logistics, intelligence and combat support. "The expansion of EUMAM to Ukraine would be a key step towards ensuring strategical autonomy for Europe and speeding up training schedules. Given the reluctance of Americans to send land forces, Washington could inactive contribute in the form of ISR capabilities," they explain to the military.
Realizing the inability to supply adequate personnel along a long "contact line" (1200 km) analysts compose about the creation of a demilitarised region specified as between North and South Korea with facilities, sensors, mines and observers throughout the front.
In addition, Europe would make a no-fly region or air surveillance region over key territories of Ukraine to deter Russian air strikes. F-35, Typhoony and Gripeny would defend Ukraine's critical infrastructure, and an integrated air defence system, including US Patriot systems and French-German SAMP/T systems, long-range radar and drone countermeasure technology, would defend Ukraine from Russian rocket attacks and drones.
The military warns that the deficiency of a European consequence will only dare Russia to further destabilise the safety of our continent.
The question of sending European forces to Ukraine is, in their view, "not only a symbolic gesture", but a "strategic necessity". They recognise that in the face of the U.S. withdrawal, "Great Britain and its European allies must lead efforts to save Ukraine and what will stay of the post-war rule-based system".
Otherwise, we will return to the politics of the large powers of the 19th century, a policy of balance of power of powerful states, which will foster the improvement of nationalism, reinforcement and the conflict to safe resources.
The authors so urge to establish different alliances, make a cyber defence network and increase the exchange of intelligence to "against Russian disinformation campaigns".
The military expects Europeans to focus on the integration of Ukraine into NATO or at least EU membership to "provide safety guarantees under Article 42.7 of the Treaty on European Union. Although this article is considered weak, Brussels could tighten it up to give Ukraine almost adequate safety guarantees," we read.
The expedition of troops to Ukraine would besides be a test for the European ability to delegate its forces to another regions of the world.
“ In the face of Ukraine’s conflict to survive, European leaders must guarantee that they are not just spectators but active participants in shaping the safety of their region, ” they conclude. Without immediate and permanent military commitments, the foundations of Europe themselves are at risk. The debate's over. Europe must act."
The insistence of CEPA analysts appears at a time erstwhile another American experts clearly indicate that Europe, without American support, is incapable to formulate and send peacekeeping forces.
Emma Ashford associated with Georgetown University wrote in the magazine abroad Affairs in the last period that sending European soldiers to Ukraine will neither end the war nor prevent another outbreak. The prof. emphasizes that Kiev itself should take care of its safety and NATO allies should return to Russia's policies of deterrence.
The analyst besides suggested that "the membership of Ukraine in NATO remains improbable in the long word and improbable in the short term". This is due to opposition from any members of the alliance, and the war added further obstacles.
Sources: cepa.org, PCh24.pl
AS
