Vilnius One of the most momentous decisions on European security architecture since the end of the Cold War is to be made at the NATO summit in Vilnius this Tuesday and Wednesday.
Is the Western Defense Alliance going to Ukraine’s membership bid? Despite the unabated Russian war of aggression, are the allies ready to put the previously non-binding NATO perspective for Kiev into concrete terms?
US President Joe Biden has a clear answer to these questions: No. Ukraine is “not ready yet,” he said shortly before leaving for the Lithuanian capital. But the debate doesn’t end there, it’s only just beginning. Under no circumstances does NATO want to send the signal in Vilnius that it would abandon Ukraine in its defensive struggle.
According to Biden, the Americans want to make extensive security commitments – and thus enable Ukraine to repel Russian attacks on its own.
There is talk of an Israel model that is intended to bridge the time between a ceasefire in Ukraine and a possible NATO membership. Israel does not have a formal defense pact with the US, but receives substantial arms supplies and technological support from the Americans.
Scholz rejects automatic accession
In the case of Ukraine, American security commitments are to be supplemented by similar bilateral arrangements with European partners. Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) also rejects an automatism or a timetable for NATO accession. Instead, he describes it as a “top priority” of the summit to strengthen the fighting power of the Ukrainians.
That’s not enough for the government in Kiev. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is striving for the fastest possible integration into NATO, even though he is aware that accession is realistic only after the end of the war. Zelensky therefore wants at least one binding promise for the future: an official invitation to join the alliance when the war is over.
From the Ukrainian perspective, any result that does not include a realistic prospect of accession would be a disappointment. Selenski receives support from northern and eastern European NATO countries. Kiev has also recently had an advocate in French President Emmanuel Macron.
The Lessons of Budapest
Everyone in NATO knows that Ukraine has had bad experiences with security guarantees. In the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, Russia, the United States and Great Britain assured her of territorial inviolability. But the agreement has proven to be a serious miscalculation.
>> Read here: USA could offer post-war protection to Ukraine like Israel
At that time, the Ukrainian government ceded the nuclear weapons stationed on its country from the collapsed Soviet Union to Russia. The security promises that the Ukrainians received in return were worthless. Without its own nuclear deterrent, your country fell victim to the imperial ideas of Kremlin ruler Vladimir Putin.
Biden will draw a clear border around Ukraine as long as the war against Russia is raging there.
(Photo: IMAGO/NurPhoto)
NATO membership would place Ukraine under the US nuclear umbrella. But that is exactly what the Americans do not want to allow as long as the outcome of the war against the Russian invaders and the country’s political future are unclear.
President Biden has repeatedly emphasized that NATO’s alliance promise, enshrined in Article Five of the North Atlantic Treaty, has “sacred” significance for him. The US is determined to defend “every inch” of NATO territory.
A non-NATO Ukraine would mean war could return. Oleksii Makeiev, Ambassador of Ukraine to Germany
But Biden is drawing a clear border around Ukraine as long as the war against Russia is raging there. Because the US President has also made this unmistakably clear: the USA does not want to be drawn into a confrontation with the Russian armed forces that could escalate into a nuclear exchange.
>> Read here: More and more blockades – NATO despairs of Erdogan
From Washington’s point of view, the vague prospect of accession is also politically useful: it serves as a lever to push through reforms in Ukraine, for example in the fight against corruption or the strengthening of democratic institutions
USA sees no consensus in the alliance
The Israel model is therefore an attempt to put off Ukraine – and at the same time to avoid a rift in the alliance. “I don’t think there is unanimity in NATO to bring Ukraine into the NATO family right now, in the midst of a war,” Biden said in a television interview over the weekend. The primary goal of the United States is to keep the alliance together.
It remains to be seen whether this will succeed with the plan for security assurances. Despite weeks of talks, the representatives of the NATO countries have so far not been able to reach a consensus on the Ukraine passage in the Vilnius final declaration. This is extremely unusual for NATO. The Alliance rarely haggles over wording until the last moment.
High expectations for NATO summit in Lithuania
Transferring the Israel model to Ukraine poses considerable problems, which Eastern European NATO diplomats in particular are pointing out. Most importantly, Israel has nuclear weapons.
The nuclear rearmament of Ukraine, on the other hand, is not up for debate. In this respect, the arrangement with Kiev would only be a second-rate Israel model, if at all. In addition, the upgrade would cost a lot of money and tie up production capacities in the western armaments industry, which are also needed to make the NATO countries’ own armed forces fit for war again.
Ukraine has been a NATO candidate for 15 years
The US supports Israel with about $3.8 billion each year. According to a recent report by the US Congressional Research Service, no country has received more US military aid since the end of World War II. In the case of the Ukrainians, however, the need for aid is likely to be even greater. Unlike the Israelis beset by Iran and Arab countries, the Ukrainians face a great power.
>> Read here: Despite the turn of the century, Europe’s bonsai armies have little to oppose Putin – one comment
This is another reason why the Ukrainian government has been pushing for the NATO perspective for weeks. In recent days, Zelensky has visited Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Turkey to promote his position.
This is how the Handelsblatt reports on the Ukraine war:
The main concern of Ukrainians is that postponing accession talks after the end of the war means that Russia has an incentive to continue its aggression. If a peace agreement threatens Ukraine to join NATO, which the Kremlin wanted to prevent at all costs, Putin could be tempted to let the conflict flare up again and again as needed.
“A Ukraine outside of NATO would mean that war could return,” says Ukraine’s ambassador to Germany, Oleksii Makeiev. The “only way” to end Russian aggression against Europe is to “send a strong signal” at the NATO summit. NATO must no longer allow any ambiguity, even if Ukraine’s accession does not happen today or tomorrow.
For weeks now, Ukraine has been trying to recapture parts of the territories stolen from Russia.
(Photo: AP)
Ukraine has been a candidate for accession for 15 years. “Ukraine will become a member of NATO,” affirms Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary General of the Alliance, again and again – but without answering the crucial question of when that will be. In 2008, NATO promised membership, but did not specify a timeframe. Putin took advantage of this state of uncertainty when he launched an attack on Ukraine in 2014 with the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula.
For weeks now, Ukraine has been trying to recapture parts of the territories stolen from Russia. But the long-prepared counter-offensive is making slow progress. Observers see the reason for this in the Russians’ strong defense lines, problems with the supply of ammunition and the superiority of the Russian air force.
In addition to the announcement of new arms deliveries – German government representatives spoke of a “very substantial” package on Monday – according to diplomats in Vilnius, a European coalition of states could decide to start a training program for Ukrainian F-16 pilots.
The fighter jets, which Ukraine has so far lacked in its arsenal, are in some cases significantly superior to the Russian models and could help turn the tide of war.
More: Why Ukraine’s offensive is faltering