Ukraine May Become A NATO Member, But Not While President Zelensky And President Putin Are In Office. NATO Secretary-General Pushing Past Forward Lines Of Support For Ukraine Membership.
Ukraine May Become A Member Of NATO, But Neither President Zelensky Nor President Putin Likely In Office To See It- Even If Each Seeks And Wins Another Term In March 2024 (Five-Years For Ukraine And Six-Years For Russian Federation).
Regardless Of How Ends The Russian Federation-Ukraine War, Will Ukraine Gain NATO Membership While President Putin Remains Head Of State Of The Russian Federation? Doubtful, Although There Will Be Advocacy For “epicaricacy” And “schadenfreude”
On Background From Four NATO Foreign Ministers- Their [Current] Governments Will Not Permit Ukraine To Become A Member Of NATO While President Zelensky Is Head Of State. There Are “Trust Issues” And “Compatibility Issues”
Absence Of Taxpayer Accountability Leads Jens Stoltenberg Past Forward Lines Of Some NATO Members. Not His US$113.1 Billion Borrowed By U.S. Taxpayers In 2022.
“NATO stands with you. Allies and partners stand with you, too.” Is There A Difference When Mr. Stoltenberg Says “NATO” “Allies” “Partners” And “Members”?
Not All Members Of NATO Support Ukraine As A Member Of NATO And Not All Members Of NATO Support Beginning The Process For Ukraine To Become A Member Of NATO Absent An Outcome Of The Russian Federation-Ukraine War. Support For The “Process” Does Not Necessarily Mean Support For “Membership”
“I would like to tell all our partners, who are constantly looking for compromises on Ukraine’s path to NATO, that our country will be uncompromising on this issue.” Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine (2019- )
Important To Consider That Governments Change- So Opposition Today May Become Support Tomorrow- And Support Today May Become Opposition Tomorrow.
For Ukraine- Continuing To Say It, To Repeat It, Will Not Make It So. It Will Create Further Friction. Arrogance Will Not Win Friends- Or Votes.
The Government Of Ukraine Needs To Cease Pushing Too Much, Antagonizing Those Who Do Not 100% Support Them. Ukrainians Are Not Dying For NATO Members And NATO Personnel Will Not Die For Ukraine. NATO Has No Obligation To Ukraine.
President Zelensky Wants NATO Membership Now So He Can Have Another Platform To Demand That NATO Defend Ukraine- That’s Selfish Thinking: He Really Wants Other Countries To Sacrifice Their Citizens.
President Zelensky Seeks NATO Membership For Some Of The Same Reasons He Seeks European Union Membership- To Better Position Him For Re-Election In March 2024.
“We must give Ukraine all it needs on the battlefield to prevail as a sovereign and independent nation. NATO will also continue to support other Partners that face pressure from Russia, including Moldova, Georgia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.” Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
NATO members (31): United States, United Kingdom, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Albania, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Montenegro, Croatia, Czech Republic, Poland, Estonia, Romania, Germany, Slovakia, Greece, Slovenia, Hungary, Spain, Turkiye, Latvia, and North Macedonia. The Kingdom of Sweden awaits approval from the governments of the Republic of Hungary and the Republic of Turkiye.
From media reporting: “NATO has no official presence in Ukraine and provides only nonlethal support to Kyiv, but [Jens] Stoltenberg has been the strong voice of the alliance throughout the war.”
For Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation (2000-2008 and 2012- ) the phrase “no official presence” must be challenging to digest. Throughout the territory of Ukraine is NATO member-provided equipment; NATO members are training members of the armed forces of Ukraine; NATO members are providing strategy (including outcome modeling analysis and war gaming) to the armed forces of Ukraine; NATO members are providing the armed forces of Ukraine with real time intelligence, satellite imagery, and technical guidance to target the armed forces of the Russian Federation; and NATO members have intelligence and military assets in Ukraine. NATO leadership, although not all NATO members, profess that Ukraine will be a member of NATO. What then, precisely, would be a “NATO official presence” in Ukraine? Members of the armed forces of some or all the thirty-one members of NATO commanding tanks, flying sorties, engaging in direct combat? Ample evidence for President Putin to define the Russian Federation-Ukraine war as a “proxy war” with NATO. A useful reminder: NATO’s mandate is focused upon defensiveness rather than by force identifying opportunities to obtain new real estate for its portfolio.
“All NATO allies have agreed that Ukraine will become a NATO member. But the main focus now is of course on how to ensure that Ukraine prevails. What we do know is that our support helps Ukraine move toward the Euro-Atlantic integration. Without a sovereign, independent Ukraine, there is no meaning in discussing membership. Let me be clear, Ukraine’s rightful place is in the Euro-Atlantic family. Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO.” Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary-General of NATO
Will NATO define a Ukraine as “independent” if it has territorial boundaries different from those on 23 February 2022 and/or 19 February 2014 and/or 24 August 1991?
Will NATO define a Ukraine as “independent” absent the territory of the Crimean Peninsula? Absent in totality or portions of the Donbas Region (Donetsk Oblast and Luhansk Oblast), Zaporizhia Oblast, Kherson Oblast, Mykolaiv Oblast, Odessa Oblast? NATO members will argue that there must be more rather than less.
Can a “sovereign” Ukraine be defined as one which retains an active or passive or frozen conflict with a neighboring country?
What head of state of Ukraine or candidate for head of state of Ukraine will adopt a position of accepting in perpetuity the ceding to the government of the Russian Federation any territory which defined Ukraine as of 24 August 1991? Meaning, that whatever armistice, cessation, ceasefire, peace treaty may be executed by a government of Ukraine with the government of the Russian Federation and involve a change in control of territory of Ukraine, all or part of the signed document(s) will need to be promptly repudiated for a politician to maintain short-term electability. Thus, a question: Can NATO permit Ukraine to become a member knowing in advance that the goal of the government of Ukraine is to retake territory that may have been ceded to the government of the Russian Federation? Permit as a member a government whose objective is to renew a military conflict with a neighboring country?
Will NATO members permit Ukraine to become a member of NATO while Ukraine remains- or wants to remain in military conflict with the Russian Federation? No, they will not.
On 24 February 2022, the armed forces of the Russian Federation invaded and further invaded the territory of Ukraine in what President Putin defined as a Special Military Operation [SMO] then on 22 December 2022 redefined as a war. The initial invasion by the armed forces of the Russian Federation was in part from the territory of the Republic of Belarus.
The war between the Russian Federation and Ukraine did not commence on 24 February 2022. The roots began their trajectories on 20 February 2014 when the armed forces of the Russian Federation invaded the Crimean Peninsula and the area known as the Donbas Region (Donetsk Oblast and Luhansk Oblast).
The government of Ukraine believes NATO should have approved membership for Ukraine prior to 2014 and then in 2014 and in 2022 Ukraine would have invoked Article 5 of the NATO Charter and sought the deployment of member equipment and personnel into the territory of Ukraine to engage directly with the armed forces of the Russian Federation. However, Article 5 does not require any NATO member to deploy anything anywhere. Article 5 does not require any member to invoke a military response. The government of Ukraine presents that had Ukraine been a member of NATO prior to 2014 or prior to 24 February 2022, the armed forces of the Russian Federation would not have invaded because Article 5 would have been dissuasive. The government of Ukraine may be correct. The issue now is moot. From NATO:
“In 1949, the primary aim of the North Atlantic Treaty – NATO’s founding treaty – was to create a pact of mutual assistance to counter the risk that the Soviet Union would seek to extend its control of Eastern Europe to other parts of the continent. Every participating country agreed that this form of solidarity was at the heart of the Treaty, effectively making Article 5 on collective defence a key component of the Alliance. Article 5 provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.
Article 5- “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
This article is complemented by Article 6, which stipulates: “For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack: on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer; on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.”
With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.
This assistance is taken forward in concert with other Allies. It is not necessarily military and depends on the material resources of each country. It is therefore left to the judgment of each individual member country to determine how it will contribute. Each country will consult with the other members, bearing in mind that the ultimate aim is to “to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
At the drafting of Article 5 in the late 1940s, there was consensus on the principle of mutual assistance, but fundamental disagreement on the modalities of implementing this commitment. The European participants wanted to ensure that the United States would automatically come to their assistance should one of the signatories come under attack; the United States did not want to make such a pledge and obtained that this be reflected in the wording of Article 5.”
“At NATO, we are also focused on Ukraine’s post-war needs. Most important of all, you need to know that Russia will not wage war against you again. Building on our existing support, NATO is now working on a multi-year support initiative for Ukraine. It will help you to transition from Soviet-era equipment and doctrine to NATO equipment and doctrine. It will ensure full interoperability with the NATO Alliance. And it will move Ukraine closer to its rightful place in the Euro-Atlantic family. Ukraine’s future is in NATO. Ladies and gentlemen, Ukraine continues to face a terrible test. A brutal, unprovoked war of aggression by a revisionist neighbour. No city or region in this country has been left untouched. And the effects continue to shake the world. But Ukraine is not alone. NATO stands with you. Allies and partners stand with you, too.” Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary-General of NATO
Mr. Stoltenberg said he and Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine, discussed a NATO support program for Ukraine. “This will help you transition from Soviet-era equipment and doctrines to NATO standards and ensure full interoperability with the alliance. NATO stands with you today, tomorrow and for as long as it takes.”
“There is no objective barrier to the political decision to invite Ukraine into the alliance. The time has come for the (alliance’s) leaders to define the prospects of Ukraine’s acquisition of NATO membership, to define the algorithm of Ukraine’s movement towards this goal, and to define security guarantees for our state for the period of such movement- that is, for the period before NATO membership.” Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine (2019- )
“De facto, we have already made our way to NATO. De facto, we have already proven compatibility with Alliance standards. They are real for Ukraine- real on the battlefield and in all aspects of our interaction. We trust each other, we help each other, and we protect each other.” Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine
“Now, when the majority of people in NATO countries and the majority of Ukrainians support the entry of our country into the alliance, it is time to take the appropriate decision.” Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine
“I would like to tell all our partners, who are constantly looking for compromises on Ukraine’s path to NATO, that our country will be uncompromising on this issue.” Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine
“This old concept of why Ukraine should not be given membership is outdated. It doesn’t meet the reality check. The truth is that we are not getting any closer to that open door. I’m happy for my friends from Finland who are becoming NATO members and who share more than 1,000 kilometers of border with Russia. So, NATO is not afraid of having a joint border in the north, but somehow is afraid of having a joint border in the south?” Dmytro Kuleba, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine
“Obviously, there is long-standing commitments to providing Ukraine with a path to NATO membership. The priority of course, at the moment, is about their self-defense in the here and now… ultimately on that path to NATO membership, but I think the sequencing is important- and today’s work is helping them defend themselves.” James Cleverly, Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs of the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland)
There are also two countries, Georgia and the Republic of Moldova, whose governments have aspired to become members of NATO (and the Brussels, Belgium-based European Union (EU)) that have a similar problem to Ukraine which will prevent them, like Ukraine, from becoming members of NATO- the armed forces of the Russian Federation control and occupy significant territory within their respective borders. The armed forces of the Russian Federation occupy approximately 20% of the territory of Ukraine.
The government of Ukraine may be worth the fullest support of NATO. What the government of Ukraine is not worth today is membership in NATO. Helpful if officials of the government of Ukraine would cease the incessant whining…. Ukraine is not becoming a member of NATO while any military conflict whatsoever exists between the armed forces of Ukraine and any other country or countries- particularly with the armed forces of the Russian Federation.
Repeatedly inserting into discussions, the desire more of a demand, the government of Ukraine become the thirty-second, or thirty-third member of NATO is an unnecessary distraction from what is important- ending the Russian Federation-Ukraine war.
Dmytro Kuleba, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, shared the 11/12 July 2023 NATO Summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, is an opportunity for the organization to “to show that the door is not only open but that there is a clear plan on when and how Ukraine will enter it.” There is a clear plan- but the first step along that multi-year plan begins with the absence of armed conflict within the territory of Ukraine and along the borders of the territory of Ukraine. The government of Ukraine will not be a member of NATO until the Russian Federation-Ukraine war has ended.
Oleksii Reznikov, Minister of Defense of Ukraine, shared the government of Ukraine required security guarantees to dissuade future incursions into the territory of Ukraine by the armed forces of the Russian Federation: “There is no alternative to Ukraine's accession to NATO.” Ukraine as a member of NATO is not essential for NATO.
Continuing to push for what will not be forthcoming may eventually result in an unwelcomed comment by a head of state or head of government… that the government of Ukraine stop being a pest. This confrontation should be avoided- unless a goal of the government of Ukraine is to provoke the response believing the moment will create a groundswell of support for the government of Ukraine. That would be a foolish presumption.
There is no consensus among NATO members for the government of Ukraine to become a member of NATO. There may be a moment in private or in public where a head of state, head of government, foreign minister or secretary of state, defense minister, or secretary of defense, whispers- or not, into the microphone or during a roundtable with representatives of the government of Ukraine… “Please just shut-up about membership.”
When President Zelensky continues to reference what he knows and everyone else knows is not happening as to NATO membership for Ukraine- as too will not happen membership for Ukraine in the twenty-seven country EU while there exists armed conflict with the Russian Federation, the persistence is childish- tantrums not getting what is desired. NATO membership will not be used as a pacifier for unruly behavior.
EU members (27): Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden.
Similar challenges for Ukraine becoming a member of NATO exist as the country seeks to become a member of the EU. Membership in the EU sounds wonderful in the abstract, even romantic- notions of solidarity, particularly to the Brussels, Belgium-based bureaucracy (European Council and European Commission) which guides the EU. But, decisions to expand membership require unanimity. Another forty-four million EU citizens- adding more than 10% to the current approximately four hundred million is a challenge. An additional mouth to feed from the EU budget- including subsidies, additional candidates for EU funding, EU financing. Another member who can block decisions (which must be unanimous). Another workforce displacement issue.
Ukraine membership in the EU will not be a moment for years- it will continue to be a series of moments with gradual integration. The government of Ukraine should embrace that process for NATO membership too. Finish the war and then focus upon what comes next- because how “finish” is defined will determine what comes next.
