NATO has presented a more flexible approach for Ukraine’s entry into the Western security alliance, but without providing a definite timeline for membership. This decision has disappointed both Ukrainian citizens and President Volodymyr Zelensky, who had hoped for a clear path to NATO membership. The reason for the hesitation lies in the fact that Ukraine is still engaged in a significant conflict with Russia in Europe, and allowing Ukraine to join NATO would invoke a defense article that would involve the U.S. and its allies in the conflict.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg’s proposal includes increased support and relations with Ukraine, the establishment of a new council specifically for working with Kyiv, and the removal of a procedural step towards membership. Stoltenberg emphasized that the decision sends a strong and positive message to Ukraine about enduring support and a potential path to membership.
However, President Zelensky criticized the proposal for not providing a direct timeline for membership, claiming that it would embolden Russia. Zelensky argued that Ukraine deserved respect, and deemed it unprecedented and absurd that no timeframe was set for the invitation or membership.
Although the outcome was not surprising, Michael Purcell, an expert on Russia and international security, stated that anything less than ensuring Ukraine’s membership would be disappointing for the country. However, he acknowledged that this is how NATO operates, and Zelensky would likely not be surprised by the decision in a calmer moment.
The disappointment for Ukraine’s NATO aspirations was particularly significant because the people had hoped for a breakthrough at the summit. Oleksiy Goncharenko, a member of Ukraine’s parliament, expressed the hopes of millions of Ukrainians, emphasizing the morale boost an invitation from NATO would provide.
Ukraine initially expressed its interest in joining NATO back in 2002, and in recent years, there have been calls for a formal Membership Action Plan (MAP) process. These calls increased after Russia’s annexation of Crimea, the separatist war in eastern Ukraine, and the invasion of Ukraine.
The deal proposed by NATO includes a multi-year assistance program to enhance interoperability with Ukraine, the establishment of a NATO-Ukraine council, and the removal of MAP as a requirement. However, some analysts argue that this agreement does not significantly improve cooperation and interoperability with Ukraine, as they are already receiving the best training and support from NATO. Removing the requirement of MAP also eliminates strong oversight power, considering Ukraine’s struggles with corruption and democratic challenges.
NATO, in a communique published on Tuesday, confirmed that Ukraine’s future lies within the organization and that it will be admitted once the conditions are right. However, it remains unclear if those conditions include a ceasefire as a geopolitical goal.
President Biden has expressed his stance against a faster track for Ukraine’s membership, emphasizing the need for anti-corruption and democratic reforms first. Admitting Ukraine into NATO during the ongoing conflict could invoke Article 5 and lead NATO members to join the conflict against Russia, which the White House wants to avoid.
While there is a clause in Article 5 that allows allies to take necessary action when a member is attacked, it does not necessarily mean an all-out war with Russia. However, admitting Ukraine into NATO poses risks due to the increasing unpredictability of Russian President Vladimir Putin, including his willingness to use nuclear arms as a form of blackmail.
In conclusion, NATO’s offer provides a more flexible approach for Ukraine to join the alliance but does not provide a clear timeline for membership. The decision takes into account the ongoing conflict with Russia and the potential repercussions of invoking a defense article. While disappointing for Ukraine, this outcome was not entirely unexpected. The agreement includes increased support and relations with Ukraine, the establishment of a new council, and the removal of the MAP requirement. However, some analysts argue that this agreement does little to enhance cooperation and does not address Ukraine’s challenges with corruption and democracy. The NATO communique confirms Ukraine’s future within the organization but leaves the conditions for admission unclear. President Biden supports Ukraine’s membership but believes it should first focus on anti-corruption and democratic reforms. Admitting Ukraine into NATO during the conflict presents risks due to the erratic behavior of Russian President Putin.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
