Russia on Wednesday refused to entertain discussions about deploying foreign troops to Ukraine, with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova saying Moscow will not accept any proposals for an international post-conflict security force raised at or after the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok.
Key takeaways
- Maria Zakharova said Russia will not discuss a multinational security force for Ukraine “in any format.”
- The comment came during the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok on 3–4 September 2025.
- European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently said the EU has “pretty precise plans” for a multinational force.
- Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is due to meet European leaders in Paris to discuss post-conflict guarantees.
- French President Emmanuel Macron described security guarantee details as worked out but “extremely confidential.”
- Moscow and Kyiv remain far apart: Russia demands territory in four annexed regions; Ukraine refuses to cede land.
- US President Donald Trump has pledged to seek a swift end to the war and is scheduling talks with Zelenskyy and Vladimir Putin.
Verified facts
On the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told reporters Moscow would not consider «fundamentally unacceptable and security‑undermining foreign intervention in Ukraine in any form.» Her remarks were published on 4 September 2025.
The statement responded to recent comments by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who told the Financial Times earlier this week that the EU had developed “pretty precise plans” to deploy a multinational security force to Ukraine should a peace agreement be reached.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders were scheduled to meet in Paris on Thursday to refine post-conflict security guarantees for Kyiv. French President Emmanuel Macron said the guarantees’ details have been worked out but remain “extremely confidential.”
Moscow has made clear that any peace deal would need to address territory it annexed since 2022, specifying land in four regions. Kyiv has repeatedly rejected ceding sovereign territory as part of a settlement.
Context & impact
Disagreement over post-war security arrangements highlights a core obstacle to negotiations: who would provide security and under what mandate. Western proposals for a multinational force aim to offer assurances to Ukraine while limiting direct NATO deployment inside Ukrainian territory.
Russia’s categorical refusal complicates diplomatic planning in Paris and narrows options for European planners. If Moscow maintains this position, European and Ukrainian officials would need alternative frameworks for guarantees that avoid stationing foreign forces on Ukrainian soil.
- Diplomatic effect: Russia’s stance increases the diplomatic friction ahead of planned talks and could stall efforts to finalize a peace framework.
- Military implication: Without an agreed external force, Kyiv would rely on bilateral guarantees or domestic arrangements for immediate post-conflict security.
- Political consequence: Publicly stated positions from Moscow and Kyiv make compromise more politically costly for leaders on both sides.
“Russia is not going to discuss the fundamentally unacceptable and security‑undermining foreign intervention in Ukraine in any form,”
Maria Zakharova, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman
Unconfirmed
- Precise troop numbers, contributing countries or command structures for any proposed multinational force have not been publicly released.
- Specifics of the EU’s “pretty precise plans” cited by Ursula von der Leyen remain confidential and unverified in full.
- Timing and agenda items for the expected phone calls between US President Donald Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian President Vladimir Putin have not been fully confirmed by all parties.
Bottom line
Russia’s firm rejection of foreign troops in Ukraine narrows the acceptable negotiating space for post-conflict security arrangements. European and Ukrainian officials face a choice: adapt guarantees to avoid permanent foreign deployments or continue seeking a formula acceptable to Moscow, a prospect that appears unlikely given current public positions.