Amid the negotiations on a ceasefire and a possible truce , the possibility of introducing some kind of peacekeeping contingent into Ukraine to monitor compliance with this truce is also being considered. Various options for a peacekeeping contingent are being proposed. For example, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has proposed creating a "coalition of the willing," which any country can voluntarily join. French President Emmanuel Macron is calling for the creation of a peacekeeping mission under the auspices of the UN. It was even reported that China is considering the possibility of participating in a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine. How effective are various peacekeeping missions, whether peacekeepers are needed in Ukraine, and what this peacekeeping will lead to - in the material of "Apostrophe".
Successes and failures of peacekeepers
As history shows, most military peacekeeping contingents that worked in war and conflict zones acted in accordance with UN decisions and were officially called "UN Peacekeeping Forces", known as "Blue Helmets".
The purpose of such missions was to separate the parties, monitor the observance of the ceasefire, protect the civilian population from hostilities, and facilitate political negotiations between the adversaries. The first UN mission to the Middle East was approved on May 29, 1948.
And in just 77 years, the UN has sent more than 2 million military peacekeepers to various countries.
But, as studies have shown , UN missions in recent decades have not been particularly effective.
Among the successful examples of UN peacekeeping operations, one can mention the mission in Cambodia (1992-1993), where peacekeepers helped organize free elections and a transition to peaceful life, as well as the mission in Sierra Leone (1999-2005), which managed to end a ten-year civil war.
However, more often than not, UN missions have ended in failure. An example is the mission in Rwanda (1994), which failed to prevent the terrible genocide in which over a million people died, or the mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the presence of peacekeepers did not prevent the mass massacre in Srebrenica, in which over 8,000 Bosnian Muslims died in a few weeks.
UN missions have also failed to stop war and genocide in Sudan, Somalia and Cambodia. The peacekeeping contingent in Lebanon can do nothing to stop a new war between Israel and Hezbollah. Moreover, according to Israeli media, UN employees received bribes from Hezbollah in exchange for the opportunity to use peacekeepers as “human shields”. And for a fee, the “blue helmets” allegedly even gave Hezbollah access to video from their surveillance cameras installed on the Lebanese-Israeli border.
Sometimes, peacekeepers assembled by a regional group of states have been more successful in stopping hostilities and preventing violence. An example of this is the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). ECOWAS's armed peacekeepers have participated in ten military operations on the continent, including twice in Liberia and three times in Guinea-Bissau, and have usually achieved their goals.
NATO missions are also known. Among them are both successful and unsuccessful. The NATO mission in the former Yugoslavia can be called successful, where it was possible to stop the war, although using the strategy of "coercion to peace". Since 1999, a NATO mission known as KFOR (Kosovo Force) has been operating in Kosovo, thanks to which it has been possible to deter Serbia from attacking Kosovo. But the NATO mission in Afghanistan turned out to be a complete failure.
In this context, one can also mention the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization) forces, which were created at the initiative of Russia and include, in addition to the aggressor country, Belarus and the states of Central Asia. Their peacekeeping successes are not worth mentioning at all, since they act only in the interests of Russia.
"The history of the creation of peacekeeping contingents since the last century shows that their mission very rarely achieves results, " says Oleksiy Melnyk, co-director of foreign policy and international security programs at the Razumkov Center, lieutenant colonel in the reserve, participant in UN peacekeeping operations (1996, 1997), in a conversation with "Apostrophe." - The effectiveness of peacekeepers depends on the consent of the parties, a clear mandate of the mission and the readiness of the international community to ensure security and order. Sometimes success also depends on coercion for peace, as was the case in Yugoslavia."
Who wants to join the coalition?
After Donald Trump began active efforts to end the war in Ukraine, Ukraine's European partners became more active with peacemaking initiatives.
So, on March 12, the defense ministers of Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and Poland met in Paris, promising concrete steps to strengthen European defense and provide security guarantees to Ukraine.
French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer began to actively work on the topic of creating a peacekeeping contingent in Ukraine after the end of the hot phase of the war.
On March 15, Starmer held a virtual meeting of the so-called “coalition of the willing” to discuss plans for a Western peacekeeping force for Ukraine, numbering more than 10,000 troops. But, as it turned out, not all European countries want to send their troops to Ukraine. At that time, Emmanuel Macron called for the creation of a peacekeeping mission under the auspices of the UN.
There were also reports in Western media that China had approached the European Union about the possibility of involving its peacekeepers in the "coalition of the willing." The Chinese Foreign Ministry later denied this information.
Meanwhile, Emmanuel Macron announced that a summit of the "coalition of the willing" will be held in Paris on March 27, which will also be attended by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
That is, the topic of a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine is still at the discussion stage.
What kind of peacekeepers does Ukraine need?
"If we are already talking about deploying peacekeepers in Ukraine, then, in my opinion, there are several options, " explains former SBU employee Ivan Stupak to Apostrophe. "The first is an international contingent under the auspices of the UN. But here it is necessary that Russia agrees to this option. Theoretically, such a contingent can be entered on equal terms by countries that Russia, on its part, proposes, and we, on the other hand. Only in this case can there be at least some chance that Russia will adhere to the ceasefire . "
Perhaps, according to the expert, there is another option, more radical.
"Western instructors can be deployed in Ukraine. They won't be exactly peacekeepers, but with their actions they will help maintain the ceasefire, " Stupak continues. "What will they do? For example, they can patrol our airspace 150 kilometers from the contact line. They can shoot down missiles and drones over our territory if necessary, and the guys from the Armed Forces of Ukraine will perform their duties directly on the contact line."
Political scientist Volodymyr Fesenko believes that reaching an agreement on a peacekeeping mission between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, even under the auspices of the UN, will not be easy.
"Russia is categorically against the participation of NATO countries as peacekeepers. Ukraine will be against the participation of CSTO countries as peacekeepers. And then, to form a peacekeeping corps, we will have to look for relatively neutral countries that will suit both Russia and Ukraine, " the expert tells the publication. "Even if a decision is made, it will take time to resolve organizational and financial issues regarding the formation and deployment of a peacekeeping corps, I think at least half a year."
According to Oleksiy Melnyk, this version of a peacekeeping mission, like in the former Yugoslavia, does not suit us, it will not be successful.
"I don't think we should take the peacekeeping mission in Yugoslavia as an example, as some experts suggest. The conflict in Yugoslavia has nothing to do with Ukraine. I was there and saw everything with my own eyes. There was a civil war there, and we have aggression against an independent country, " Melnyk explains. "The conflict there was on an area of 70 by 30 kilometers. If you scale it to our territory of combat operations, then we would need about several tens of thousands of peacekeepers. Back in 2014, we calculated how many peacekeepers were needed in Donbas to deter Russia. And then we came to the number of 40-50 thousand. And now the territory is many times larger."
According to the expert, the UN mission in Ukraine is doomed to failure.
"But, at the same time, we should not reject the option of international presence. For example, Europe could take the side of Ukraine and make sure that Russia has no desire to continue aggression against Ukraine. At the moment when we are talking to you, this option seems unlikely, but the events surrounding the Russian-Ukrainian war are developing so quickly that I would not reject it. Anything is possible," predicts Oleksiy Melnyk.
Meanwhile, all experts drew attention to the fact that any peacekeeping mission leads to a freezing of the conflict, which Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly spoken out against.
