In April, the Estonian government informed the allies that we would be ready to put our skin on the line.

This would mean combat companies of the Scout Battalion on Ukrainian soil.

“In addition to this, there are also training opportunities, staff officers and perhaps, if the Ukrainians need it, a ship,” Tsahkna adds. “Estonia is the most straightforward here.”

How did this decision come about?

Of course, it all started with Donald Trump, the US president’s message that the war must end immediately and Europe must guarantee Ukraine’s security.

The British and French were the first to adapt to this.

“The UK is ready to put its boots on the ground, planes in the air,” British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced in February. French President Emmanuel Macron promised to stand by its allies.

And then came the great Oval Office disaster.

The same one where Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky tried to talk about security guarantees and the Americans beat him with verbal sticks.

The message had to be sent by Western European leaders. The Americans had to be shown that Europe was taking the matter seriously. And the Ukrainians had to be shown that no matter what happens, Europe has their backs.

That day, March 2, the Coalition of the Willing was announced. Coalition des volontaires.

It’s not a random name. The same name was used for the alliance that went to Iraq at the request of former US President George W. Bush.

But a murmur of suspicion went through Tallinn that evening. Why didn’t Starmer invite any Estonians to the important meeting?

“We realized pretty quickly that if we want to be taken seriously in these discussions at all, we have to have a message,” says Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur.

And what better message than having our skin in the game?

Besides, a coalition of the willing is of little use if no one shows a clear will. Even the British didn’t go much more specific than their “boots on the ground” formulation. Other countries were even more cautious.

“In order for the formation of a coalition to be taken seriously, it was clear that we had to raise the flag,” says Pevkur.

Discussions between the State Chancellery, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Defense went on for several weeks. And in April, the government, gathered in the basement of Toompea, made a decision: if the guns fall silent and Estonia’s major allies are on board, we are ready to send our company to Ukraine.

At the same time as us, the Lithuanians made a similar promise.

Generals at the map

During the spring, a dozen countries gathered that said they were ready to send their troops to Ukraine. But there were far fewer who talked about specific units.

You can't really blame this. Because there was no agreement yet on what, how, and why to do in Ukraine. Many questions remain unanswered to this day. Yet, the map of Ukraine was rolled out in March and military planning began.

The coalition of the willing has two lines of action. Thus, the staff involved in planning was also split into two.

Some had to figure out how to build up Ukraine's defense forces after the weapons fell silent. That would involve training and a lot of weapons.

Other staff officers had to figure out what a Western military contingent operating on Ukrainian soil could look like. What would be needed to take control of the Black Sea? How and with what forces to control Ukrainian airspace?

What capabilities should the ground forces have? And should they be located in specific sectors of the front where the Russian threat is greater? Or should they be kept somewhere in western Ukraine to respond from there if necessary?

The military personnel of nearly thirty countries met in several countries. The headquarters is led from France.

On the one hand, this is normal military planning. The enemy is known. One can calculate one's own forces. The route of movement and suitable areas are shown in advance on a map.

At the same time, there are a huge number of open questions.

First, no one can say when and under what conditions the guns will fall silent. Will there be a shaky ceasefire between the countries or a more solid peace treaty? Where will the front line be and what will be the situation of the Ukrainian forces by then?

Second, it is not known how many countries are actually willing to contribute and with what kind of forces.

And third, and this is the most important: what is the goal of the operation?

What are we really promising?

Western politicians from Paris to Vilnius repeat the slogan of lasting peace. But there is no consensus among the capitals on what they are prepared to do for it.

What powers, intervention thresholds or rules of use of force will be given to the units framed by the expression “reassurance force”.

It is precisely in this phrase “reassurance force” that Macron and Starmer repeatedly use that there is an important mental trap. It should give Ukrainians courage. The certainty that they are not alone.

And yet it differs from the expression used by Prime Minister Kristen Michal in a press release at the end of April when she promised Ukraine a company. She said “deterrence force”. Deterrence force.

That would be a degree stronger. And it clearly states what message the units stationed in Ukraine should give to Russia. If you attack again, we will kill you.

"Deterrence doesn't cost a penny if Russia thinks that deterrence will not oppose Russia," says Marko Mihkelson, chairman of the Riigikogu's Foreign Affairs Committee.

The promise to resist is a difficult political decision. It means being prepared to shed blood for the freedom of Ukraine. And to lose lives. “I am more than certain that there is no such consensus among the countries of the coalition of the willing at the moment,” says Mihkelson.

Until this certainty is there, it is impossible to answer the questions of how much force will actually secure Ukraine. Is it only those who are currently on the territory of the country? Or are the Western countries prepared for a battalion to be sent to help a company on the ground and a brigade to a battalion in the event of a violation of the peace agreement?

This has not even been seriously discussed yet.

But the planners of the defense forces are not bothered by such ignorance, and the plans have gradually begun to be filled with real forces. Whether it is good or bad, no one is saying. But the countries that are putting specific military units on the table have increased in the past six months.

The Turks have been signaling for some time that they may take control of the Black Sea. The Belgians could help by controlling Ukrainian airspace.

Czech President Petr Pavel has spoken of a willingness in principle. Canada also does not rule out sending troops. “And my feeling is that more countries will come,” says Pevkur.

It all comes down to the US

There was a fair amount of deadlock over the summer. For a long time, there were about a dozen countries that were talking about sending any troops at all.

Behind the hesitation is one of the biggest question marks in the whole undertaking – that same Donald Trump.

“We have always told the Americans that one way or another, the US must be there,” says Pevkur.

And the Americans have always said that their military boots would not set foot on Ukrainian soil.

The operation would be unthinkable without US intelligence and transport aircraft. Their air defense systems and long-range strike force are desperately needed.

A solid rear is just as important.

Even if the US does not send troops to Ukraine, they are expected to promise that if Russia does violate the peace treaty, they will come to the aid of the Europeans. This promise in itself would be more of a deterrent than anything else.

In August, after Trump and Russian dictator Vladimir Putin met in Alaska, things seemed to be moving.

“We managed to get the following concession: the United States can offer Ukraine protection similar to Article 5,” US special envoy Steve Witkoff told reporters.

In some ways, the message was disgusting. The principle of the Coalition of the Willing is that Russia should have no say in whose forces move in Ukraine. Moreover, Russia soon announced that it still did not want Western countries in Ukraine.

On the other hand, it gave Europe hope that the Americans were ready to make concrete promises. “The United States is involved,” Trump said a few days later.