Detailed planning for a potential “coalition of the willing” peacekeeping mission to Ukraine is expected to kick off this week among Western military commanders, says the Canadian general in charge of overseas and domestic operations.
The notion of a peacekeeping force is being met internationally with skepticism as Ukraine and Russia meet indirectly to hammer out a limited ceasefire.
Lt.-Gen. Steve Boivin suggested Canada would be stretched to contribute, but it’s possible if the troops that are training Ukrainian forces are re-purposed for peacekeeping.
He told CBC News that a preliminary gathering of senior military commanders from 28 nations that have expressed a willingness to contribute to the force — to be deployed in the event of a ceasefire — was held last week in the United Kingdom.
Boivin took part in the discussions.
Indirect ceasefire negotiations between Russia and Ukraine began on Monday in Saudi Arabia, an effort mediated by the United States. The two countries have agreed in principle to a one-month halt on strikes on energy infrastructure after U.S. President Donald Trump spoke with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last week, but there’s uncertainty over how it will take effect.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer several weeks ago proposed a peacekeeping force made up of several NATO countries, including Canada.
In early March, prior to Sunday’s federal election call, Defence Minister Bill Blair said Canada was ‘ready and able’ to contribute troops should there be a ceasefire.
“I’ll emphasize that we don’t know what the conditions of such a ceasefire could be. So we are working off a number of assumptions and developing contingency plans,” Boivin said. “The overall aim is to offer options to decision-makers.”
Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, last weekend dismissed Starmer’s peacekeeping plan as “posture and pose.”
U.S. President Donald Trump said he intends to end the war in Ukraine, but exactly how that could unfold is up for debate. Andrew Chang breaks down what Russia, Ukraine and the U.S. all want from a resolution, and how conflicting interests make their goals incompatible. Images provided by Getty Images, Reuters and The Canadian Press.
At the same time, several U.K. media reported Monday that top British military commanders — quoted anonymously — say the prime minister has gotten out ahead of himself. They said detailed planning won’t be completed by April 20 — the White House deadline for a ceasefire.
It is evident it will be a struggle for Canada to contribute.
Canada is in the midst of an election and should the new government agree to deploy peacekeepers, it is faced with the reality there aren’t a lot of Canadian troops to go around.
The military has been struggling to refill the ranks following the COVID-19 pandemic and a sexual misconduct crisis that affected a number senior commanders.
There are up to 400 Canadian troops involved in training Ukrainian forces and Boivin said one of the options under consideration for his headquarters is “re-rolling” some, or all, of them for a peacekeeping mission.
“The guidance I gave my team is: let’s start with what we already have on the ground,” said Boivin, referring to troops deployed overseas.
The training of Ukrainian soldiers — basic recruits, medics and tank crews, among others — was a marquee talking point for the Liberal government as it underlined its support for the embattled country. More than 32,000 Ukrainian troops have been trained under Operation Unifier and its continuation has often been a major ask by Zelenskyy’s government.
Boivin said one of the reasons training troops may need to be re-purposed is because the army is fully engaged with its commitment to build and lead a NATO brigade in Latvia.
“We are not going to affect our contribution in Latvia,” Boivin said. “We’ve made a commitment to NATO.”
He said allied military planners have started to look at the size and composition of the potential peacekeeping force, and how heavily armed it would have to be.
That is a legitimate worry given allied intelligence estimates that show there are about 700,000 Russian troops in and around Ukraine, and the Ukrainian military has over one million soldiers under arms.
Size of needed force could be massive
In a recent analysis for the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, Benjamin Jensen wrote that given the approximately 2,100 kilometre-long front line — the size of the peacekeeping force would potentially be massive.
“The security force required to truly safeguard the peace in Ukraine could be as large as the entire military of either Greece or Spain,” wrote Jensen, a senior fellow with the think tank, in a Feb. 25 online commentary.
“In other words, peacekeeping in Ukraine has the potential to eclipse previous NATO missions in the Balkans in both its size and complexity.”
It could range — he estimated — from anywhere between a few thousand soldiers all of the way to 100,000, a force that would also have to be heavily armed and backed up.
“To ensure security, this force must not only act as a deterrent but also have the war-fighting capability to counter potential Russian fait accompli attacks along the frontier,” Jensen wrote.
“And this force will require additional air, naval and space assets to cover air and maritime corridors Russia could use to launch a future pre-emptive attack.”
Anthony King, a professor from the University of Exeter’s Strategy and Security Institute, suggested the underlying assumption has always been that any peacekeeping force in Ukraine would need U.S. backing.
“It looks likely that European nations would, as a coalition, be able to put together a credible force, and that might generate enough goodwill in the White House for the president to provide some additional support,” King said in a statement on the talks in Saudi Arabia.
“American infrastructure support at the very least would be essential, so the peacekeeping force could make use of the U.S.A.’s impressive air defence systems. This would be essential to securing the security of Ukraine in the future.”
