In response, US National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said from Washington there’d be “no US troops on the ground in a combat role in Ukraine”, while Britain said it had “no plans to make a large-scale deployment” beyond the small number of personnel in the country supporting the armed forces of Ukraine, including for medical training.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who had sat beside Macron at a hastily arranged summit of 25 European leaders in Paris that day, said participants at the meeting had agreed “that there will be no ground troops, no soldiers on Ukrainian soil who are sent there by European states or NATO states”.

Hungary’s Viktor Orban, who has refused to send arms to Ukraine since the beginning of Russia’s invasion, said the war had “no military solution”, while Slovakia’s Robert Fico, equally hostile to any military support of Ukraine, has reiterated his opposition as a matter of “principle”.

The fact Macron’s suggestion was met with such a strong reaction, even consternation in some quarters, was proof, some observed, of how unready Europe was to face down Russian President Vladimir Putin should he choose to test the West, perhaps with an attack on the vulnerable smaller nations on NATO’s eastern flank.

The 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea was an insufficient wake-up call for NATO, but since Russia’s 2022 large-scale invasion of Ukraine, the alliance’s militaries – about to span 32 countries with the addition of Sweden – have been slowly getting ready to fight.

Much of this, many NATO nations admit privately, was sparked by the public lashings from former US president Donald Trump who in 2016 said the alliance was “costing us a fortune”.

“We’re protecting Europe with NATO, but we’re spending a lot of money,” he said, later saying at a rally that NATO was “obsolete”. Last month he lined up for another crack when he said during a campaign rally he would “encourage” Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies who don’t spend enough defence funds.

NATO’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has forecast that by the time leaders meet in Washington this July, 18 allies will be spending at least 2 per cent of their GDP on defence – a major improvement over 2014 when only three hit that target. This year European NATO nations will spend about $US380 billion ($584 billion) on defence.

And Stoltenberg said any ally not spending at least 2 per cent of GDP on defence must have plans to swiftly meet that target. But some argue it is more complicated than that. Some nations’ defence spending is wholly allocated to NATO while others, meanwhile, might set their spending at less than 2 per cent, but their spending per head is greater than that of those who meet the NATO guideline.

For example, Luxembourg falls short of the 2 per cent, but in per head terms, it spends more than Poland or France. The US may spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on defence but not all of that is allocated to NATO, with much of its strength being deployed in the Pacific and on its home territories.

But in his 10th and final year as head of the world’s biggest military alliance, Stoltenberg believes Europe is more ready than at any time during the past few decades to defend itself against any threat. In the two years since the invasion he has welcomed two new members, agitating Putin but further strengthening the alliance.

“The world has become more dangerous, but NATO has become stronger,” he said at the Munich Security Conference 10 days ago. “And the purpose of NATO is to prevent war, is to ensure that there is no room in Moscow for any miscalculation about NATO’s readiness and resolve to protect all allies.”

While Stoltenberg continues to stress he does not believe there is an imminent threat to a NATO ally – which would require each of the military alliance’s 31 countries to come to its aid under Article 5 of the treaty – Western nations are growing more concerned about Russia potentially attempting to rekindle a frozen conflict in Moldova on the border with Ukraine.

Loading

In a worrying move, the leadership of the breakaway region of Transnistria on Wednesday appealed to Moscow to “stop the genocide” and help the Russians in the region, a call that was reminiscent of Ukraine’s separatists in eastern Donbas, who sought Russian help at the outset of the conflict in 2014.

According to Transnistrian authorities, about 200,000 people of a population of less than half a million are Russian. Moscow also has a military base in the enclave, with about 1300 soldiers left after a secessionist war over Transnistria in 1992 claimed 700 lives.

In his state of the union speech on Thursday, in which he warned of nuclear war if the West deployed troops in Ukraine, Putin refrained from mentioning the Transnistrian call for help. But the Russian foreign ministry said protecting the secessionist region was one of Moscow’s priorities and that it would carefully consider the request.

Justyna Gotowska, the coordinator of the regional security program at the Centre for Eastern Studies in Warsaw, said there was a clear difference within Europe regarding threat perceptions and policy priorities. She said the countries on NATO’s northeastern flank felt a real threat coming from Russia.

“They believe the probability of Moscow staging an armed attack on a NATO country is high – though dependent on several factors like the course of the war in Ukraine, a possible crisis in the Indo-Pacific, credibility of deterrence in Europe, and political cohesion within NATO,” she said.

“This perception is reflected in these countries’ investments in national defence, which exceed 2 per cent of GDP, and in the speed of strengthening their armed forces with new capabilities.”

Gotowska said the views in Western Europe were much more reserved, with nations such as Germany and Britain not believing Russia could militarily challenge NATO countries.

“Nevertheless, there is a consensus that deterrence and defence in Europe need to be enhanced, albeit not to the extent the northeastern flank countries deem it necessary,” she said.

Oana Lungescu, a former NATO spokeswoman who is now at the Royal United Services Institute in London, said while defence spending across NATO’s European allies and Canada had gone up by an unprecedented 11 per cent over the last decade, or $644 billion, it was still not enough.

She said the trend needed to shift towards 3 per cent for them to meet the capability and readiness requirements for NATO’s new defence plans and to step up support for Ukraine as it enters the third year of Russia’s war.

Loading

“Trump’s statements should focus minds, but more talk of European strategic autonomy risks deepening a transatlantic divide just as the world’s autocracies are coming closer,” Lungescu said. “If Europeans are serious about defence, as they should be in a dangerous world, they need to put their money where their mouth is.”

While allies question the wisdom of Macron’s bold statement this week, the man himself on Thursday stood by his call that sending troops into Ukraine remains an option. His fears are driven by a growing sentiment that a Ukrainian defeat would inflict a psychological blow on the West while emboldening Putin.

“These are sufficiently serious issues; every one of the words that I say on this issue is weighed, thought through and measured,” Macron told reporters. “Nothing should be excluded. We will do whatever it takes to ensure that Russia cannot win this war.”

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.