NATO held a summit in Lithuania last week. Member-nations expressed a long-term interest in allowing Ukraine to join, echoing a promise made back in 2008 in Bucharest. The vague terms for inclusion, however, were derided by Ukraine’s president. A sober reflection suggests caution is a wise move, though.
NATO leaders met in Vilnius, Lithuania, on July 11 – 12. There they pledged military support to Ukraine. They even pledged eventual NATO membership, but Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, was incensed when NATO did not lay out a clear path or a timeline. After a minor uproar over his comments, Zelenskyy later appeared more contrite and appreciative of the aid he was receiving. All members agreed that Ukraine could be admitted after its war with Russia concluded but the only terms proffered were: “when allies agree and conditions are met.”
While Ukraine’s admission to NATO may seem like an ordinary next step, it warrants a long-term perspective. Russia fought multiple wars with Lithuania in the 16th century, was invaded by France in the 19th century, and fought Germany twice in the 20th century. In each case, Russia had only one front to defend—its west. However, Ukraine hooks around Russia’s southern border and stretches further east than Moscow. If Ukraine joins NATO, a second front immediately appears on its south. This would permanently heighten fear in Russia, similar to the way Cuba did to the United States during the Cold War. There has been much discussion recently on how NATO’s eastward expansion contributed to Russia’s fear and ultimately to its invasion of Ukraine. A permanent NATO-member on its southern border would exacerbate this. Increasing Russia’s fear makes the world less safe, not more.
A better status for Ukraine would be similar to the one NATO has with Israel: a stand-off pledge of security assistance. For Russia, the best move is to oust Putin, get in a reformer, make peace with Ukraine. Blame the entire mess on Putin; then behave like a brother, helping Ukraine rebuild their country, playing-up their shared ancestry, and promoting cultural exchange. Ask them nicely not to join NATO but be forgiving if they do (accept that they’ve been through a lot). Perhaps, in a generation or two, Ukraine will find it has enough in common with Russia to join them when nation-unions form toward the end of this century.
Source: Karl Ritter, Liudas Dapkus, “Ukraine Wins G-7 Security Pledges, but NATO Membership Remains Elusive,” Associated Press, 11 July 2023; accessed from https://apnews.com/article/nato-summit-ukraine-biden-2e7d25531e659bb9aa7274e203b0711b
Ivo Daalder, “For Moscow, that NATO Summit Must Have Been Highly Alarming,” Politico, 19 July 2023, accessed from https://www.politico.eu/article/vladimir-putin-russia-moscow-nato-summit-alarming-ukraine-war/ Steven Erlanger, “Despite Successes at NATO Summit, Divisions Remain,” NY Times, 12 July 2023; accessed from https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/12/world/europe/nato-summit-ukraine-biden.html
“The Role of NATO: Enlargement Revisited,” Council on Foreign Relations, 11 March 2022; accessed from https://www.cfr.org/event/role-nato-enlargement-revisited
“Stephen Wertheim: The West Cannot Ignore Role NATO Expansion Played in Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine,” Democracy Now, 13 July 2023; accessed from https://www.democracynow.org/2023/7/13/china_nato_summit
Photo: MapsofWorld
No responses yet