"Once a peace agreement is reached, troops will be deployed immediately, aircraft will be in the air, and maritime support will be provided by NATO countries willing to participate."
— Mark Rutte, NATO Secretary General, February 3, 2026
A BAD PEACE = A HARDER WAR
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte made an unexpected visit to Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada—just hours after massive Russian strikes on the capital. The war did not stop. The ceasefire, announced by Putin and Trump "at personal request," lasted only a few days. Now, the West presents a new peace formula.
This is not a metaphor. This is the Alliance's official position. Not "possible," not "in the future," but immediately. After the papers are signed—British and French military bases inside Ukraine, American reconnaissance drones in the sky, Canadian ships near Odesa. All under the guise of the so-called "coalition of the willing", but with full NATO support.
For those still chanting the mantra "better a bad peace than a good war"—it's time to wake up. Such "peace" will not end the conflict but mark its new, more dangerous phase. Russia has already declared: any NATO troop presence in Ukraine is a red line. The West, through Rutte, responds: "You won't get Minsk-3 or Budapest-2. Only real guarantees—with iron, missiles, and aircraft."
History does not forgive naivety. The 1994 Budapest Memorandum guaranteed Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for giving up nuclear weapons. We all see how that turned out. The Minsk Agreements? They became a tool to buy time for rearming the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Now, the West says it outright: without military presence, there will be no guarantees.
WHO STANDS BEHIND THE "COALITION OF THE WILLING"?
- United Kingdom and France — have already signed a "Declaration of Intent" to establish military hubs in Ukraine.
- United States — despite Trump's statements, is ready to provide ceasefire monitoring, intelligence, and deterrence systems.
- Canada — among the first to confirm participation in the maritime component.
Formally, this is not "NATO in Ukraine." In reality, it is Alliance military infrastructure on Russia's border. Moscow sees this as a direct threat to its security. And not without reason.
TWO VIEWS OF THE SAME PEACE
For Kyiv and Brussels, this is protection against renewed aggression.
For Moscow, this is the final militarization of a neighbor under the enemy's banner.
Rutte emphasized: "NATO is learning from Ukraine. You apply innovations in a unique way." But if learning means copying, the next step is not just technology transfer, but joint combat deployment. On Ukrainian soil.
CONCLUSION: NO THIRD OPTION
Either Ukraine continues to resist—and gains more opportunities to become NATO's forward outpost.
Or it agrees to a "bad peace"—and turns into a slow-burning minefield, where every base, every radar, every military advisor is a trigger for new escalation.
The choice is not ours. It is for those who decide what matters more: the illusion of stability or real security.
For now, the war continues. Only now it is fought not just on the fields of Donbas, but in the texts of peace agreements, in satellite reconnaissance logs, and in the code of AI platforms like Matrix, turning city cameras into artillery eyes.
SOURCES & REFERENCES
— Yellowstone End Intelligence Brief
#Episode035 #NATOonUkraine #NoPeaceWithoutTroops #MatrixWarfare
.jpg)
