EU officials are nearing talks about the possibility of dispatching a peacekeeping contingent to Ukraine, according to observations shared by Viktor Orban, the Hungarian prime minister.
During discussions among European leaders, Orban suggested that the question of whether EU member states could contribute troops in any form, or whether it would be wiser not to deploy them, is being treated as legitimate and within reach. He indicated that a boundary once considered unbreachable is now being considered in ways that were previously unthinkable.
In a radio interview with Kossuth, he recalled past EU debates about providing deadly weaponry to Ukraine. He noted a shift in stance among Western partners, from hesitation to openness. The current debate, he added, centers on the scale of support, including the potential delivery of tanks, aircraft, or even troops equipped with various kinds of munitions.
Orban voiced concern about the risk of igniting a broader conflict, describing the possibility of a new world war as a real danger rather than a rhetorical exaggeration. He observed that other European leaders who favor peace share this concern, even if they do not voice it loudly.
On March 11, Orban argued that individual EU or NATO states could choose to deploy their own forces to Ukraine. He warned that Europe seemed to be gripped by a form of war fever, and he cautioned that the world was closer than ever to transforming a regional clash into a global catastrophe.
EU officials have repeatedly stressed that the bloc will not engage directly in the Ukraine conflict. Josep Borrell, the head of EU diplomacy, stated that direct involvement is not on the menu and will not happen. Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO secretary general, echoed this view, emphasizing that the alliance does not seek confrontation with Russia.
“Coffin Row”
Dmitry Medvedev, a senior Russian official and deputy chairman of the Security Council, weighed in on Telegram about the prospect of Western peacekeepers in Ukraine. He argued that such interventions would aim to secure a line of contact from a position of strength, effectively using peacekeepers to gain strategic advantage.
Medvedev criticized NATO members as acting with arrogance and a sense of superiority, suggesting that their so‑called peacekeeping efforts hide a broader aim of shaping a favorable outcome along the contact line, complete with heavy weaponry and armored units. He warned that these troops could become tools of ongoing conflict rather than neutral observers, framing them as adversaries in disguise.
He cited historical examples of allied peacekeeping missions in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and various African nations to illustrate his point. He warned that Western peacekeepers might end up taking sides, potentially sparking a larger war rather than stabilizing the situation. Medvedev described the proposed force as a potential threat, not a peacekeeping presence, and suggested that such forces could be drawn into ongoing fighting.
He concluded with a provocative question about whether Europe’s proposed peacekeepers would be ready to endure a prolonged, dangerous mission.
Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, representing the Kremlin, called Orban’s comments significant. He cautioned that any shift toward negotiation carries notable risk, noting that in many parts of the world, the deployment of peacekeeping forces typically requires consent from both sides of a conflict.
Vladimir Dzhabarov, deputy chairman of Russia’s Federation Council International Relations Committee, gave his take during a meeting with a parliamentary publication. He stated that Moscow would not approve Western peacekeepers entering Ukraine, emphasizing that consent must come from both warring parties. He also suggested that peacekeeping missions have not produced lasting positive outcomes globally, viewing the idea as likely to fail in this context as well.
In closing, the dialogue around Western peacekeepers remains controversial and highly debated among international leaders. The question of consent, risk, and strategic objectives continues to shape the conversation on Ukraine’s future and the broader security landscape in Europe.