Our source in the OP said that the President's Office does not believe in the possibility of sending EU troops to Ukraine, they are not ready to give us their equipment and funding, and if Europeans start dying, this will become a new trigger for Europe, which could collapse any support. Negotiations with Poland were conducted all last year that they could enter Western Ukraine and hold the northern border with Belarus, but Warsaw did not even take this step.
And now no one seriously believes Macron's statements about sending troops to Ukraine, and Western media is analyzing this case.
Bild Deputy Editor-in-Chief Paul Ronzheimer believes that French President Macron has greatly harmed Kyiv with his statements about sending Western troops to Ukraine.
“These debates, initiated at the highest level, are not only dangerous, but also harmful to Ukraine at this time, as they do not discuss truly important issues, such as ammunition.
Talk of troops is dangerous because it increases the likelihood of escalation. Putin has long believed he is at war with the West. And Macron is essentially playing into the hands of Ukraine's opponents and distracting from what Kyiv really needs.
Given Ukraine's lack of military support, especially from France, Macron's move seems like a high-profile diversionary tactic.
If Macron's goal in using NATO ground forces in the war in Ukraine was to "contain" Russia, then Vladimir Putin is unlikely to take him seriously, as Macron will not have the majority to push for the introduction of ground forces in either the European Union or NATO.
The idea that individual countries can help Ukraine with their own troops without a NATO mandate is also highly unrealistic. Because deterrence only works if it is truly credible.
With this initiative, Macron is helping all critics and opponents of arms supplies to Ukraine in Europe and Germany. Now they can all say: listen to what Macron says, THIS is the goal! First they send weapons, then they send troops!
This further complicates the supply of military equipment to Ukraine, which, given the Russian offensive, it needs more urgently than ever since the attack.
The absurdity is that Ukraine does not need any Western ground troops!
When I asked about this last month, presidential advisor Mykhailo Podoliak said: “In fact, there is only one scenario: maximum deliveries of high-tech weapons to Ukraine. Not talking, but investing money in military production: long-range missiles, drones, grenades, artillery pieces. The number of weapons should be large.”.
Don't talk, just get down to supplying weapons!
Macron can speak much better than Chancellor Olaf Scholz, but his own balance is not as rigid and clear as it seems now. It was the French president who from the very beginning did not want to “humiliate” Putin and held back military support for Ukraine. His grandiose statements that he would provide tanks and planes were often far from reality.
Macron's direct attacks on Scholz over the Taurus vote and his willingness to send troops to Ukraine are also designed to distract from his own failures.
Yes, France – unlike Germany – has supplied its Scalp cruise missiles. But Macron, like Scholz, has not rapidly and radically increased ammunition production since the beginning of the war and is far from achieving what he could and should do when it comes to tanks and artillery, if the situation is as dramatic as he describes it.”.
