The United States believes European forces should provide Ukraine with security guarantees following a peace agreement. But Herem said it is far too early to discuss such matters.

"I cannot talk about what kind of ceiling light we will install if we have not even built the foundation of the house yet. I do not see a reason to discuss this topic at length. /.../ I am not a politician or a diplomat but a military officer in reserve. I see things quite differently. First, the war must be won — however we define victory — before we can even start talking about anything else," he said discussion show "Impulss."

Herem said winning the war means Ukraine declaring that it has won.

"How much territory they manage to reclaim is one thing, but, for example, if they gain the right to join the organizations they want to, regain some land through negotiations — but not simply by drawing a line along the current frontline — then that is something. I think many Ukrainians might not even want some of the territories they have lost back. But that is not a decision anyone can make over their heads," he said.

Herem added that in the current situation, where intense fighting is ongoing, discussing the deployment of peacekeepers is inappropriate.

"Right now, combat is taking place. In the past 24 hours, Ukraine set a new record for shooting down Russian Shahed drones, 103, as far as I know. So the war is raging at full intensity, and we are talking about peacekeeping. To be honest, talking about peacekeepers in this situation, where Ukrainians are struggling to hold on, seems almost disrespectful to them," the general said.

Foreign policy expert Kadri Liik also found discussions about peacekeeping forces incomprehensible. She argued that it is not a given that peace in Ukraine would be brokered through U.S.-Russia negotiations.

"I think many people in Europe somehow assumed that Donald Trump would come to power, strike a peace deal with Vladimir Putin, and then peacekeepers would be needed. I do not see it as that straightforward. This scenario assumes that Russia would have to accept conditions that do not truly satisfy it. If Russia still wants to attack again, it would mean it is forced to restrain itself and abandon its objectives before even making peace. I'm not sure Russia sees it that way," she commented.

"But it is true that discussions are happening in European capitals about whether Europe could send troops to Ukraine. However, these discussions are not really about peacekeepers but rather about deterrence. The idea is that if the Russians engage in conflict with these European forces, it would provoke a greater and more powerful response. But for me, the question is where would this greater and more powerful response come from? In NATO countries, that response would traditionally come from the U.S. if NATO forces were attacked. But if the U.S. says, 'Don't count on us,' then where does the response come from? Because European countries' own capabilities are very limited. In that sense, the whole discussion feels somewhat detached from reality, as if taking place in a virtual space. And I think it's telling that countries like Poland have said they have no intention of participating in this," Liik added.

Member of the European Parliament Urmas Paet (Reform) argued that speculation and discussions about deploying potential forces to Ukraine are happening too frequently at too high a political level. He said messages from European leaders on this matter do not give a consistent impression.

"What kind of European unity are we talking about here when the British say they are ready to send troops, Emmanuel Macron hinted at it already a year ago, the Germans say 'absolutely not,' Poland also leans towards 'no,' while some others say 'let's see'? I think this discussion should be put on hold. Right now, it's a pointless conversation that only deepens internal divisions within Europe, which is exactly what Putin wants. And, unfortunately, a significant part of Trump's team also wants to see increased discord in Europe. There are plenty of people today who wish harm upon Europe. Now, the important leaders of Europe should find the wisdom to move past the idle talk phase," Paet said.

Foreign Ministry Secretary General Jonatan Vseviov agreed that excessive discussion and daily public statements on the matter are unnecessary.

"It would be better if these discussions were more balanced, better-informed, and conducted in a way that we do not mix up basic concepts. But right now, it seems like we are," he said.

At the same time, he stressed the need for discussions about the future of European security.

"If these discussions took place calmly — and there are certainly places where they do — and focused on how we envision the future of European security, Ukraine's place in it, and what kind of guarantees we can convincingly establish, then these would all be necessary and relevant discussions, for which it is not too late. Rather, now is the right time. If not now, then when?" Vseviov said, adding that if allies reach an agreement together, Estonia will also be part of those agreements.

The official agreed with Herem that instead of sending peacekeepers, the focus should be on actions that help Ukraine achieve a position of strength in potential real peace negotiations.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!