“The U.K. is on a collision course with Russia as Sir Keir Starmer prepares to double down on his plans for a peacekeeping force in Ukraine which would be partly led by British troops,” the British publication The iPaper reported on Feb. 18. The article continued with one whopper after another:
“Western leaders are understood to believe that an effective peacekeeping force would require sending a message to Russia that if it breaks the agreement, its troops will be met with force and the U.S. military will stand behind the response—even without sending its own troops in to Ukraine.” The article went on to quote an unnamed U.K. government source: “The guarantee is so that the Russians do have that deterrent effect. This is the deal that we think is there and this is what we want to talk about in Washington next week,” when Starmer will visit the U.S. capital. “We need to know that there is a meaningful U.S. backstop.”
The only problem with the whole story is that the Russians have stated emphatically that they will not allow troops from any NATO/European country on Ukrainian territory. Not to mention the fact that the Trump administration has stated repeatedly in the last few days that there will no American troops in Ukraine, and no “backstop” for these British-style provocations.
