According to The Telegraph journalists, the real reason NATO members refused to extend an invitation to Ukraine for membership at the summit in Washington is the reluctance of many Alliance members to take such a step.
Points of attention
- The USA and other NATO countries have a negative attitude towards Ukraine's membership prospects due to the conflict with Russia.
- Denial of membership for Ukraine could lead to defeats for NATO in deterring Russia and protecting allies.
- An alliance of democracies with a strong willingness to use military power is needed to restrain despots in Europe and the world.
- NATO leaders should carefully consider how refusing to accept Ukraine will affect the credibility and future of the Alliance.
- It is essential to understand that relations with Ukraine are crucial for the security of Europe and the international order.
How and why NATO has a negative attitude towards Ukraine's membership prospects
Joe Biden vehemently opposes anything more than the meaningless formulation of “a well-lit bridge” to Nato membership. The best he is willing to do is sweeten the pill with a 10-year bilateral defence pact that changes very little and, tellingly, is cancellable with six months’ notice., the publication emphasised.
The publication's authors cite the example of Sweden and Finland, which joined NATO almost instantly without any bridge, but such a scenario is impossible for Ukraine.
With Putin’s battles raging, all of the member states know that they would effectively be at war with Russia from the moment of Ukrainian accession, the journalists of the publication note.
The article emphasises that Kremlin dictator Vladimir Putin has lured the Alliance into a trap.
What is the threat to NATO if Ukraine refuses membership
In particular, the decision to reject Ukraine's membership in NATO will harm the Alliance and the decision to approve membership.
NATO's primary goal is deterrence, and despite its far greater economic and military power than Moscow's, the Alliance has been unable to contain Russia.
Putin understood that application of strength is entirely dependent on moral and political will. His perception of the West’s weakness in those areas was amplified by Biden’s ignominious withdrawal from Afghanistan just months before he invaded, not to mention appeasement of Iranian aggression since the start of his presidency, the authors of the material note.
It is emphasised that if Ukraine does not achieve victory because the Alliance cannot provide what is necessary for defence, it will be another defeat for NATO.
And if it is unwilling to have Ukraine as a member for fear of being drawn into direct conflict with Russia, then how likely is it that American, French, German or British leaders will be willing to send their sons and daughters to fight and die for the sovereignty of Poland or the Baltic States, even though they are NATO members? Putin is not going to curb his imperialist ambitions in Europe, and nor will Xi Jinping in Asia or Ali Khamanei in the Middle East. To deter and, if necessary, confront these despots we need an alliance of democracies who don’t just have military power but also the real and perceived will to use it. Nato leaders would be well advised to take time at their summit to contemplate that dilemma and how their refusal to have Ukraine as a member impacts on the alliance’s credibility, the journalists of the publication conclude.
It is noted that NATO leaders would do well to take time at their summit to consider this dilemma and how their refusal to accept Ukraine as a member would affect the credibility of the Alliance.
