Ukraine has been given 30,000 drones by Nato countries and a $500m (£409m) military support package from the US – but experts have warned that it will not be enough to cope with Russian aggression, especially if Ukrainian support plummets after Donald Trump takes office.
Defence Secretary John Healey pledged to support Ukraine against Vladimir Putin “for as long is takes” as he unveiled plans deliver the 30,000 drones, which will cost £45m and have been paid for by the UK, Denmark, Netherlands, Latvia and Sweden.
However, academics and defence experts told The i Paper that the drone package will make no noticeable change to the trajectory of the war.
“Ukraine is using and producing millions of drones now, with Russia keeping pace,” said Dr Ulrike Franke, senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations think-tank.
“Hence, 30 000 FPV [First Person View] drones, as large as the number seems, won’t make an enormous difference.
“Still, the number is high, and if these are capable systems – capability mainly being measured against their ability to evade Russian air defences – they can make a difference and help stabilise certain parts of the front.
“Hence, this delivery is good news for the Ukrainian military which will certainly put these systems to good use. While these systems may help to win battles, they will not have an impact to the overall trajectory of the war.”
Stephen Hall, lecturer in Russian and post-Soviet politics University of Bath, told The i Paper that, while the drone package will help Ukraine, it will not be a “game-changer”.
He said: “30,000 drones is a significant number and it’s certainly helpful for the Ukrainians because that is their best weapon, as it were, but it’s not going to win the war itself.
“There is no ‘wonder weapon’ that is going to actually win the war. But 30,000 drones will certainly help.”
The US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin announced on Thursday that a further $500m (£400m) in security assistance will be delivered to Ukraine, including missiles for fighter jets, maintenance equipment for F-16s, small arms and ammunition.
Could British peacekeeping troops be sent to Ukraine after the war?
If Trump manages to broker a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, it is possible British troops could be called upon for peacekeeping, multiple security sources have told The i Paper.
However, Professor Hall rejected the claims, highlighting that Russia would not allow British near its border.
He said: “In terms of British troops as peacekeepers, that’s simply not going to happen, in my opinion.
“I don’t imagine it’s going to happen, because Russia is simply not going to allow it. Russia is not going to allow what it calls troops from unfriendly countries to be in Ukraine. Having allegedly started this war in part because of Nato expansion, it is not going to allow Nato troops into Ukraine, that is quite clear.
“The only way they [the peacekeepers] are entering Ukraine is if the Ukrainian government agrees to it and Western governments are prepared for the simple fact that it will be peacekeeping operation, but will have to use violence, at least in the beginning.
“The idea that British peacekeepers are going to be on the Dnipro River I suspect is simply not going to happen.”
Evie Aspinall, director of the British Foreign Policy Group think-tank, said that although Russia may not approve of British peacekeepers after the war, that does not mean it will not agree to a peacekeeping mission involving an ad-hoc group of nations.
She said: “In any negotiation, it is highly unlikely that Russia will accept Ukrainian membership of Nato, however, Ukraine will require peace and security guarantees before signing any agreement.
“An international peacekeeping force authorised by the Security Council could be one solution.
“However, the most natural formulation of such a group would be via Nato which Russia would likely oppose.
“Russia may be more willing to accept a more ad-hoc group of nations being involved in any peacekeeping mission.”
Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Friday there was a “mutual desire” to set up a meeting between Trump and Putin after the president-elect revealed that a meeting between the pair is being arranged, without confirming a timeline.
Putin “wants to meet, and we are setting it up”, Trump told reporters on Thursday.
“He has said that even publicly and we have to get that war over with. That’s a bloody mess.”
However, Professor Hall cast doubt on the prospect of a meeting between Trump and Putin yielding a favourable outcome for Ukraine, suggesting that it is more likely to lead to compromises at Russia’s benefit.
“I don’t think Vladimir Putin is prepared to actually deal – he believes he is winning the war. He believes that Donald Trump will destabilise Europe in terms of not providing support to Ukraine and Nato is going the way of dodo, in Putin’s view. So why is he going to negotiate?
“I think it has been shown that Ukraine has to effectively demilitarise, that is has to be Russian-friendly government, similar to Alexander Lukashenko in Belarus, not be able to join Nato, not be able to join the EU, and this is where Putin sees the only viability for a peace agreement.
“That may be something that Trump is willing to live with, but I suspect it would be perceived as a serious defeat for America. For a president that has tied himself in knots in terms of his campaign to make American great again, that wouldn’t be a good start.
“This would give impetus to Putin. It would potentially lead to further conflict later on, maybe in a decade’s time in Ukraine.
“There may be an attempt as well to send men into Narva, Estonia. It would certainly give other toxic powers, like China and Iran, greater impetus to destabilise the situation in their regions.
“It would highlight, as Russians have been saying for years, that America is weak, that it’s on its last legs. It would be a disaster for America.”
Vlad Mykhnenko, Professor of Geography and Political Economy, also cast doubt on the prospect of Trump securing a “just and long-lasting peace” through his negotiations with Putin.
He said: “I am 100 per cent sure Trump will uphold his promise of negotiating an end to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
“However, he would most probably fail to bring a just and long-lasting peace to Ukraine for the evident intransigence of the opposing party: Vladimir Putin thinks he is winning the war and – as far as he is concerned – another 12 months of fighting are perfectly do-able, why stop now?”
