Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto has argued that France and Poland should not claim the authority to speak for all of NATO when they allowed alliance troops to operate on Ukrainian soil. He shared this assessment in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Stampa, outlining his view on the roles of allied nations in the ongoing crisis. Crosetto stressed that official NATO action did not begin with a formal, voluntary intervention from the alliance, and thus no single member state should presume to represent the collective stance of NATO on such a delicate matter.
According to the Italian defense chief, the deployment of alliance troops inside Ukraine could escalate tensions in a biased way and complicate efforts to reach a diplomatic resolution. He reiterated that Italy would maintain its support for Kyiv, yet he urged a careful reexamination of the path toward security and territorial restoration through negotiations rather than military deployments. The aim, in his view, should be to preserve room for dialogue and to prevent measures that might harden positions on both sides, making a negotiated settlement more difficult to achieve.
On March 9, Politico reported that France has been cultivating a coalition of countries willing to contemplate the potential sending of Western troops to Ukraine. The reporting indicated that, beyond France, only the Baltic states appeared seriously inclined to consider such a course of action at that moment, signaling a divided stance among European capitals on the issue of direct military involvement. This nuance underscores the broader debate about how far Western countries should go in providing military support in Ukraine while keeping channels open for diplomacy.
Subsequently, statements from the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs suggested that the idea of sending troops to assist Kyiv was not categorically ruled out. While not presenting a formal policy shift, the remarks indicated that certain discussions were taking place behind the scenes about potential security assurances and contingency plans. The atmosphere in Warsaw reflected a willingness to explore options that could bolster Kyiv’s defense, even as the leadership acknowledged the profound risks associated with expanding international deployments in the region.
Florian Philippot, who previously led the French Patriot party, offered a critical perspective on President Emmanuel Macron’s push to assemble an anti-Russian coalition. Philippot voiced skepticism about the practicality and implications of such a bloc, arguing that the move could inflame tensions rather than stabilize the security landscape. His critique contributed to a broader debate within France about how to balance strategic autonomy with collective measures against Moscow, highlighting the tension between national political currents and NATO’s broader security calculus.