It'll be tough to fill the USsized hole in this coalition

As the group of 30 countries gathers in Brussels, it isn’t just about achieving peace in Ukraine, explains Sean O’Grady

- 

There’s a terrible sense of poignancy – if not doom – around all the meetings of the “coalition of the willing”, impressive as the grandiloquent words, the formidable roll call of nations and the glittering array of military uniforms might be.

The latest gathering was yesterday, and it’s fair to say they are making progress in constructing a “reassurance force” to help preserve the peace in Ukraine, albeit a peace that doesn’t seem imminent. To be brutally frank, and with the best will in the world, these capable, dedicated ministers and generals may be wasting their time.

At the Nato headquarters in Brussels, no less, some 30 countries, including the great majority of those in Europe, are gathering under the joint chairmanship of the UK defence secretary, John Healey, and his French counterpart, Sebastien Lecornu, to further plan the logistics of such a “force” (which may not ever be authorised to use force, though we shall see).

It seems natural that the coalition should be led by Britain and France – without being chauvinistic, given that these are the two nuclear powers on the continent, as well as being UN permanent security council members, and possess the biggest and most experienced militaries. Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer have provided exemplary leadership – both cooperative and intelligent – to this grouping.

Its membership has mostly had to lie outside Nato, sadly, because America has no interest; and outside the European Union, because Europe doesn’t have an army – though it does have Putin sympathisers (Viktor Orban in Hungary) – and because crucial powers such as Britain and Norway aren’t members of the bloc.