The US criticizes plans to send 'peacekeeping forces' to Ukraine.

According to RT on March 23, US President's special envoy Steve Witkoff said that the plan by Britain and other European countries to send peacekeeping troops to Ukraine was merely a "show of force."

In an interview with journalist Carlson Tucker, Special Envoy Witkoff stated that Britain and other European countries are overestimating their own strength in planning to send peacekeeping forces to Ukraine. According to him, the statements by European politicians about the threat from Russia are unfounded.

Witkoff emphasized that he was convinced Moscow had no plans to "annex Ukraine."

“The Russians got what they wanted. They controlled five regions. They got Crimea. They had everything they wanted. Why would they need more?” – said Witkoff.

President Trump's envoy also noted the questionable service that European politicians are providing to Ukraine, as they try to encourage Zelensky to stall at the negotiating table.

"I spoke with many European leaders and told them: 'The more you encourage Zelensky not to actively engage in peace talks, the clearer it becomes that aid will continue to be provided without any conditions. Nobody is saying that we shouldn't help Ukraine now or later in the recovery phase. But this must happen under certain conditions,'" the US envoy said.

He explained that if the U.S. intended to provide Ukraine with "a large sum of money," they would first want to know the plan of action, to understand "how this situation would be resolved."

Witkoff stressed that Washington intends to reach a fair agreement for Kyiv to resolve the crisis, but will not allow Kyiv to be drawn into World War III.

According to the Financial Times, a "voluntary coalition" proposed by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is discussing patrolling Ukrainian airspace and ensuring maritime security following the signing of a peace agreement between Moscow and Kyiv. The newspaper notes that this approach differs significantly from previous approaches that emphasized a ground presence of European troops.

At the same time, London still considers US involvement a crucial condition for deploying Western military forces in Ukraine.

Political scientist Vladimir Kornilov, in an interview with RT, argued that the US attitude toward the European peacekeeping initiative reflects the Donald Trump administration's pragmatic approach to the conflict in Ukraine.

The expert explained: “Washington understands that Europe won’t send anyone anywhere. And everything Europe is doing now with its statements about peacekeeping forces is an attempt to undermine any efforts to reach a peace agreement. Because if there’s a change of power and a change of political direction in the US, in Europe, things remain the same as under the Democratic administration, which for a long time opposed Russia. However, after losing a strong like-minded partner like the US under Biden, European politicians can’t find a better way to act than to play the key role of a fighter against Russia themselves. But they don’t have the strength and resources to do this.”

Vladimir Batyuk, a leading researcher at the Institute for American and Canadian Studies, argues that the military capabilities of individual European nations supporting the idea of ​​peacekeeping are insignificant compared to those of the United States or Russia.

“For example, if we take the British army, which is considered the most combat-ready force in Europe, they have two battalions of self-propelled artillery and 40 Challenger tanks. It’s hard to understand how they could possibly carry out peacekeeping missions along the approximately 2,000 km long Russia-Ukraine contact line. Other European countries have even worse armed forces situations. Furthermore, all allies are facing very difficult economic situations in their own countries. Under these conditions, it’s unclear where they will get the money to rearm,” the analyst explained.