1 march, 2024
French President Emmanuel Macron’s statement about sending foreign troops to Ukraine to some extent indicates a blurring of the ‘red lines’ that NATO shouldn’t be involved in hostilities on the territory of Ukraine
Oleksiy Yizhak, an analyst at the National Institute for Strategic Studies, said this on Espreso TV.
“Perhaps France has a political consideration. The industrial element is important, in that unlike American missiles, French missiles can be used against targets in Russia, at least against legitimate targets such as Iranian missiles. This is political leadership. This is the biggest blurring to date of the ‘red lines’ that Putin created in February 2022. The French, politically, this is just a colossal blurring, even destruction of these ‘red lines’, it is very important,” he said.
Talking about NATO troops in Ukraine is actually the beginning of practical negotiations on the terms of Ukraine’s membership in NATO, says Yizhak.
“France has taken political leadership to bring Europe together for certain purposes. France would like to unite European resources in its vision. What Macron said is natural. It is definitely not about NATO troops fighting instead of our troops. It is not about replacing the law on mobilization and everything related to it. Rather, it is about the agreements that Ukraine is currently concluding with Europe on the automatic response of our partners in case of danger to Ukraine,” he said.
In his words, we are talking about such forms of presence that will make the reactions of NATO countries automatic.
“This is not only a military presence, but also industrial, financian, and political. At the same time, the military presence can be different: special forces, consultants, advisors, crews that maintain equipment, engineering units. Not only is it possible, it already exists. Now the question is which countries are ready to increase such presence and take on additional obligations to automatically respond in case of danger, threats to Ukraine,” added the analyst of the National Institute for Strategic Studies.
- NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and the leaders of the Alliance stated that no general decision had been made to send troops to Ukraine, and Russia called the move a declaration of war.
- On February 29, Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas said that Western leaders should not rule out the possibility of sending ground troops to Ukraine.
For all his previous dithering, we must be thankful to Macron for taking the lead and for having initiated the important topic of NATO troops possibly being sent to help Ukraine fight the roach army.
Most European leaders are still outright against it and some quite reluctant, but if things keep deteriorating, it’s either that or allow war to move up to their respective borders. And, once mafia land wins, this will happen.
I thought for a while that Rishi might take the lead in Europe, but he turns out to be quite weak, although he’s still far more courageous than Scholz. Don’t get me wrong, I respect Scholz for all he’s done for Ukraine, making Germany the biggest military donor to Ukraine, now that the MAGA gang has kidnapped our government. But, Scholz is still governed by FEAR. He simply is not the right leader for these trying times.
I wish Macron would be House Speaker instead of that fake-Louisiana bitch Johnson.
Even my dog could be a better House speaker than Johnson.
Maybe Wicker should do the job. Dixie has great leaders, including Nikki, but the MAGA cultists keep blocking them.
Dogs are loyal.
Putinstinians are traitorous by nature.
You got that right, SOL!
But so far he has given Ukraine less than tiny Lithuania.
Independent from this, Ukrainian forces fucked up when ammo was still flowing. Ukrainian forces seem only to target the enemy with advanced weapons. But they can’t win in a true man on man war. They keep begging for advanced weapons, hiding in their trenches. And this way they want to defeat RuSSia?! I’m tired of this bullshit.
I don’t know from where you get this idea from, Mike, but how would you do things differently if you were facing an enemy who has more of everything?
I hope I am wrong but I am concerned that this whole episode is just another Macron episode of talking big while in reality sending very little actual military equipment. France’s level of military support is much less compared to many other Nato countries including economically poorer countries.
It is true that French aid to Ukraine could be improved by a lot to compare to Germany’s. For now, I’m glad that this topic is out in the open and has caused discussions to take place. NATO troops in Ukraine is no longer an issue that is hiding in some dark corner anymore, afraid to make a peep.
Through the end of 2023, France was not in the top ten Nato countries in dollars of military support sent to Ukraine. And by the way the US is still by far the biggest military aupporter of Ukraine. Through the end of 2023 , #1 approximatelyUS $44 billion, #2 Germany approx. $18 billion.
Putler’s red lines have been erased by Ukraine since the start of this war. He erased so many red lines, regarding attacks on Crimea, attacks on russian soil that muscovy run out of red paint. He makes Obama look like a novice when it comes to red lines.
The mafiosi are just like boys who keep crying wolf. The crowd that listens to putler’s threats anymore has shrunk to only a few “foreverdummies”.
Having just returned from meeting with Macron in Trump’s first National Security Briefing as President he made fun of what a wimp he thought the French president was.
And now the Uber Alpha Male Trump is the “Cheesehead surrender monkeys”.
That’s what I call irony.
I wonder whatever made the orange baboon think that he’s such a man. The draft dodger is a coward and fat, spineless snake.