France has not ruled out the possibility of deploying troops to Ukraine, according to Benjamin Haddad, France’s Minister for European Affairs. This comes amidst continued speculation regarding the involvement of NATO allies in the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia, which began in February 2022. The potential of such a deployment, which would mark a significant escalation of Western involvement in the war, has stirred debate within Europe and beyond.
Haddad’s comments reflect a subtle but meaningful shift in French policy. While Paris has actively provided military aid and support to Ukraine since the beginning of the invasion, the potential deployment of troops would represent a major step in France’s commitment to Ukraine’s defense. Speaking to the Berliner Zeitung, Haddad reaffirmed French President Emmanuel Macron’s stance that “nothing is excluded” when it comes to assisting Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression. Although a formal decision has not yet been made, Haddad’s remarks underscore the growing complexity of Europe’s role in the war and the fine line NATO allies must walk to support Ukraine without provoking further escalation.
Since the start of the war, NATO allies have been careful to avoid direct military confrontation with Russian forces. This has primarily taken the form of providing military aid, intelligence, and logistical support to Ukraine, while refraining from deploying ground troops. France, in particular, has been a key player in this strategy, having trained over 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers since the war began. In February 2023, Macron expressed caution about sending French troops to Ukraine, stating that there was no consensus on the issue but leaving the door open by noting that “nothing was excluded.” This cautious position reflects both France’s commitment to Ukraine and the broader concerns about escalation.
However, Haddad’s latest comments suggest that Paris is increasingly open to taking a more assertive role in the conflict, if circumstances warrant it. When asked whether France could potentially deploy troops, Haddad confirmed that the option remains on the table. “President Macron has said on several occasions that we must not exclude anything, and that still applies, in particular to training missions,” Haddad stated, before confirming that the deployment of ground troops had not been ruled out.
Moscow’s Perspective: A Proxy War Narrative
The possibility of NATO troops entering the battlefield is a sensitive topic, not only in European capitals but also in Moscow. From the outset of the conflict, Russian officials have portrayed the war as a proxy battle between Russia and NATO, accusing Western nations of covertly fighting against Russia through their support for Ukraine. Moscow has repeatedly warned that further Western involvement, particularly in the form of “boots on the ground,” would cross a dangerous threshold and could lead to unpredictable consequences.
The Kremlin has used the proxy war narrative to rally domestic support and justify its aggressive military actions. Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused NATO of attempting to surround and weaken Russia, claiming that Ukraine is merely a pawn in the West’s broader geopolitical struggle. Given this context, the potential deployment of French troops would likely be framed by Russian officials as proof of NATO’s direct involvement, further fueling the rhetoric of confrontation between Russia and the alliance.
In response to the rapidly evolving situation, President Macron has championed the concept of “strategic ambiguity,” a policy approach that avoids clearly defined red lines while allowing for flexible responses to changing circumstances. Macron has been one of the most vocal European leaders advocating for Ukraine’s right to defend itself, and he has not shied away from calling for tougher measures against Russia. However, he has also been cautious about taking steps that could lead to direct conflict between NATO and Russia.
During his speech at the United Nations in late September, Macron characterized Russia’s actions in Ukraine as a “war of territorial conquest,” emphasizing that Ukraine must be supported to restore its legitimate rights and sovereignty. At the same time, he called for a “just and lasting peace” but did not elaborate on how that peace could be achieved without further escalation. The idea of strategic ambiguity reflects the difficulty of finding a balance between supporting Ukraine’s defense and avoiding a wider war.
Haddad echoed this sentiment in his interview with Berliner Zeitung, stating, “The only country that has chosen to escalate since February 24, 2022, is Russia.” He reiterated France’s position that Ukraine must be empowered to defend itself but avoided committing to specific actions, suggesting that France will continue to assess the situation as it evolves.
NATO’s Dilemma: To Escalate or Not?
The broader context of Haddad’s comments is the ongoing debate within NATO over how far to go in supporting Ukraine. While many member states, including the U.S., the U.K., and Germany, have provided significant military aid to Kyiv, there remains deep unease about crossing certain lines, such as allowing Ukrainian forces to strike deep inside Russian territory or deploying NATO forces on the ground. The concern is that such actions could lead to an unpredictable escalation and potentially drag NATO into direct conflict with Russia, a scenario that most leaders are eager to avoid.
However, the growing sophistication of the weapons provided to Ukraine, including advanced air defense systems, tanks, and artillery, has raised questions about whether NATO is already on the path to deeper involvement. Macron, for his part, has advocated for a policy shift that would allow Ukraine to strike Russian military bases with long-range weapons, arguing that such actions are necessary for Ukraine to defend itself effectively. This has sparked further debate within NATO about the limits of military assistance and how best to manage the risks of escalation.
On Tuesday, Mark Rutte, the new NATO Secretary-General, reiterated the alliance’s commitment to Ukraine, stating that ensuring Ukraine’s victory as a sovereign, independent, and democratic nation remains a top priority. Rutte’s comments reflect the broader consensus within NATO that Ukraine must prevail, but they also highlight the ongoing challenge of balancing that goal with the need to prevent the conflict from spiraling out of control.
French Military Instructors
In addition to the potential for ground troop deployments, France has also considered other forms of direct involvement, such as sending military instructors to Ukraine to train its armed forces. This idea gained traction in May 2024 when Le Monde reported that France was in talks with Kyiv to send instructors as part of a broader military assistance program. This would involve French military experts working closely with Ukrainian troops to improve their combat effectiveness, particularly in the areas of counteroffensive operations and the use of advanced Western weaponry.
The proposal was reportedly discussed during meetings between General Oleksandr Syrskyi, one of Ukraine’s top military commanders, and French officials. While no official decision has been made, the idea of sending instructors could serve as a compromise between full deployment and continued military support. By offering direct training within Ukraine, France would deepen its involvement without the political and military risks associated with sending combat troops.
As the war drags on, the debate over how far Western nations should go in supporting Ukraine has intensified. One of the most contentious issues is whether Western-supplied weapons should be used for strikes deep inside Russian territory. Advocates argue that targeting Russian military bases and supply lines would significantly weaken Moscow’s ability to sustain its war effort, while opponents fear such strikes could provoke a dangerous response from Russia, including potential retaliation against NATO members.
Macron has been one of the most vocal proponents of allowing Ukraine to use sophisticated long-range weapons to strike inside Russia, arguing that Ukraine has the right to defend itself and take the fight to the aggressor. However, this stance has met resistance within NATO, where some leaders remain wary of crossing what they see as a red line that could lead to escalation.
Despite these concerns, Macron has continued to push for a more aggressive approach, stating that setting red lines only serves to limit Ukraine’s ability to defend itself. “We should stop setting red lines and rely on what we call strategic ambiguity,” Haddad told Berliner Zeitung. This position reflects a growing recognition within France that the war may require a more assertive and flexible approach if Ukraine is to succeed in reclaiming its territory.
The question of whether France will ultimately deploy troops to Ukraine remains unanswered, but the possibility alone marks a significant shift in the dynamics of European support for Kyiv. As the war grinds on with no clear end in sight, NATO allies, including France, are grappling with the challenge of how to support Ukraine without provoking further escalation. Haddad’s comments reflect the growing complexity of this situation and the difficult choices that lie ahead for Europe.
While Macron and other Western leaders continue to advocate for Ukraine’s right to defend itself, the prospect of deeper involvement, including the deployment of troops or the escalation of military strikes, raises important questions about the future of the conflict and the potential for a broader war in Europe. For now, France remains committed to supporting Ukraine, but the path forward is fraught with uncertainty and risks that could reshape the geopolitical landscape in ways that are difficult to predict.
