Can Europe restrain Russia without US military?

Donald Trump seems to have more confidence in the UK armed forces than some of his own generals – or, in this regard, many of the retired Britain’s military beards.

Asked at his press conference with the UK Prime Minister about the US security guarantees for Ukraine, Trump said: “The British have incredible soldiers, incredible servicemen, and they can take care of themselves.”

However, the US president has left the question that is hanging in the air whether the UK military may accept Russia.

In public, senior US military officers quickly praise the professionalism of the UK Armed Forces. But privately, they are often very critical of recent cuts in size, especially the British army, which now has just over 70,000 regular troops.

“Too little” is what one of the very senior US generals said at a private visit to the UK.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Russia’s military expenses are now higher than the overall security expenses, in terms of parity purchase. It increased by 41% and is now equivalent to 6.7% of GDP. Unlike this, only 2.5%will spend in the UK by 2027.

President Trump’s comments emphasize the reality that he does not reflect on putting US troops on land in Ukraine in the police any ceasefire. Any presence in the US will be economic to use mining interests.

He believes that this can be a deterrent to Russia’s attack. But even its administration thinks that there should be heavy force – provided by others. This will be resolved from European countries. The question is not only whether the will in Europe: does it also have figures?

A short answer – no. That is why Sir Kire Stersmers presses additional US security guarantees from the most powerful military personnel.

Britain is not alone in cutting its armed forces in response to the end of the Cold War. This trend in Europe is slowly canceled, and the increasing number of countries increases protection costs.

But Europe itself will not be able to ensure the force of 100-200,000 international troops, which are thought to be required by the President of Ukrainian Volodimir Zelensky to scare Russia from the attack.

Instead, Western officials said they think about 30,000 troops. European planes and warships will help control Ukraine’s air space and delivery.

This force will be focused on providing “assurances” at key sites – cities, ports and nuclear power plants of Ukraine. They will not be located anywhere near the current front line in eastern Ukraine. European fighters and warships will also monitor the air space of Ukraine and delivery.

But these western officials admit that this will not be enough, hence the calls for the American “back platform” – “to have confidence that any forces are unfolding, will not be disputed by Russia” and “give the Prime Minister confidence that he can safely deploy British forces.”

Officials believe that at least the US can provide supervision of any European forces with “team and management”, and US fighters are ready to respond from their airbase in Poland and Romania. Europe cannot comply with American space supervision or intelligence collection capabilities.

This may also agree to continue to supply Ukraine with weapons.

While Europe has recently overtaken the United States in terms of Western weapons supplied to Ukraine, one Western source said the US provided a “cream” – for example, a long range missiles and air defense system.

European countries also do not have the necessary incentives for large -scale hostilities on their own. The supply of Western weapons to Ukraine depended on the US logistics.

The NATO bombing company in Libya in 2011 also emphasized the shortcomings – when European countries allegedly came forward, but still dependent on US support. Allies relied on the US tankers and the US targeting.

But Sir Keir Starmer seems to have left Washington without the US military support guarantee. Speaking to the BBC this morning, UK Health Minister Wes Stryng suggested that the re -introduction of Donald Trump in Article 5 of NATO – causing the attack on one ally to be interpreted as an attack on everyone – may be sufficient.

But US Secretary of Defense Pitt Hugset has previously stated that any international troops sent to Ukraine would be neither invalid nor covered by the treaty. Currently, such NATO safety guarantee does not exist.

Europe’s will of freedom is being tested. The Prime Minister who convens the meeting of the leaders this weekend will soon find out if Donald Trump’s warm words will be enough to convince others to join the UK in the land bot.

France is the only other major European power that is still ready to do the same. Some countries in Northern Europe – Denmark, Sweden and the Baltic states – are ready to consider commitments, but again would like US security guarantees. Spain, Italy and Germany still oppose.

Sir Keir can still believe that there is a place to negotiate, the US can still be ready to support European power. And as for the issue of Donald Trump – will Britain take over the Russian military? Despite the fact that the Russian forces were weakened, no answer.