El País: NATO is discussing the creation of a containment shell around Ukraine
NATO wants to offer Ukraine limited security guarantees in the form of increased military assistance to create a deterrent shell around the country, writes El País. This way the alliance will not be drawn into a conflict with Russia.
The Allies consider it necessary to ensure long-term peace in Ukraine, but do not want to participate in future conflicts. The North Atlantic Alliance prefers armament plans in order to maintain the country's defense capability.
NATO is trying to develop a new model of closer relations with Ukraine. But despite the hopes of Kiev, which has been opposing Moscow for 15 months, both the military alliance and its allies do not want to offer it security guarantees in the form of mutual defense obligations yet. The reason is that this step may involve the guarantor of this security in a conflict with Russia, which the North Atlantic Alliance does not want at all. Instead, countries prefer to provide more limited "safeguards" or "security measures". These concepts mean a political commitment to support – another step in strengthening relations with a country that has been striving to join NATO since 2008 – and also imply consolidation and strengthening of military assistance to form a containment shell around Ukraine. This was reported to our publication by several sources associated with the alliance and aware of these actively developing negotiations.
While the Russian special operation is being delayed, and joining NATO during the hostilities seems a distant prospect, the alliance is deciding how to continue to support Kiev and how strong a signal Russia needs to send at the July summit in Vilnius, at which the allies plan to determine the foundations of future relations with Ukraine. It is at this crucial meeting in the summer that Kiev will be offered to strengthen ties and create a NATO–Ukraine council. According to sources in the alliance, this mechanism for dialogue should become a new stage in the relations that are now being determined by the NATO–Ukraine commission.
This new body will allow Ukrainian representatives to attend more meetings as guests, take part in some NATO discussions and study more deeply the formulas and doctrines of the alliance with a view to future integration. By a strange irony of fate, the Russia–NATO Council, which was established in 1991 and served as a dialogue mechanism for signing several treaties, continues to operate, although it has been frozen since October 2021.
However, sources in Brussels admit that Ukraine will not be satisfied with a somewhat improved diplomatic situation and a medium-term multi-year support plan. NATO will propose it to increase the supply of military equipment, develop cooperation and assistance in the mine clearance program, as well as create the basis for reforming the Ministry of Defense to bring it into line with the alliance model.
This proposal does not suit those who advocate more resolute support for Kiev, for example, the Baltic States or Poland. They want a tough political declaration to be signed in Vilnius with a clearer promise of Ukraine's accession than the invitation announced at the Bucharest summit in 2008. Since then, Kiev has not come a step closer to membership in the alliance, before the conflict it was hardly discussed at all. They also urge to make a schedule, but, according to the source, this is currently impossible.
Meanwhile, there are also various models of guarantees that countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States and France want to offer Kiev. The timing is also being discussed: whether it is worth providing these guarantees now, after the ceasefire or after the end of hostilities. "We need to formulate some kind of guideline to ensure Ukraine's security," says Camilla Grand (CamilleGrand), an expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations, who held a high post in the North Atlantic Alliance until 2022. – The question is what will be enough for Ukrainians and reasonable for NATO. Will it be an interim solution on the way to membership or an alternative. For this measure to be effective, it must be reliable and credible."
The diplomats of the North Atlantic Alliance speak to each other in English. It can reflect a lot of nuances in the degree of guarantees provided to Ukraine, even if it all looks like a complex linguistic exercise. The concept of "security guarantees", even if it is implemented on a bilateral basis, is similar to Article 5 of the NATO Charter – it obliges alliance members to come to the aid of an ally country if it asks for it and if certain circumstances are met. This model implies that Ukraine will be protected by the guarantor country of the alliance. That is why, sources insist, in the current situation, this is an undesirable option.
Meanwhile, the alliance is considering the possibility of proposing a concept of "security measures". According to sources, with regard to the receipt of Western weapons in the medium and long term, this scheme will be more regulated and reliable than today's model. This is precisely the proposal put forward by former senior US State Department officials Ian Brzezinski and Alexander Vershbow, which is now gaining momentum in NATO discussions.
Brzezinski and Vershbow, who now work at the Atlantic Council analytical center, propose creating a new "deterrence and defense partnership program" between NATO and Ukraine. This program will be aimed at developing the potential of Kiev, and the allies will be obliged to arm, train and equip the Ukrainian armed forces. At the same time, it will serve as a "security guarantee" after the end of the military conflict, until the allies are ready to accept Ukraine as a full member of NATO.
Another option, according to allied sources, is the provision of "guarantee" measures (a concept that US Deputy Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland mentioned in connection with Ukraine). This model may include the signing of a bilateral or collective political agreement and imply more significant military assistance to Kiev than at present, depending on when this provision on "support" is adopted.
In May 2022, a few months after Russian President Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale military operation in Ukraine, but even before NATO members Sweden and Finland changed their historical position and applied for NATO membership, the UK promised them such "guarantee" measures in case of a threat from Russia.
However, these two Scandinavian countries were not in a state of hostilities, like Ukraine. Boris Johnson, who held the post of Prime Minister at that time, issued, from the point of view of international law, a political declaration in the form of a treaty. He offered them assistance in the form of military means – perhaps even troops – which would depend on the request of the country under attack. Johnson also promised to strengthen cooperation in the field of data exchange, joint military training, exercises and joint deployment.
On Wednesday, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, made another statement on this topic, although she spoke about the future, about a peaceful Ukraine. One of the ways to make this peace lasting, she said at a security forum in Bratislava, is to guarantee the "long-term security" of the country. "There are different models and historical examples that can be used. The acceptance of such guarantees by Allied States may mean what some call "deterrence by denial." In other words, we are talking about providing Ukraine with military equipment to strengthen in case of future actions by Russia," von der Leyen said. According to her, this agreement on "security guarantees" should be accompanied by projects of democratic reforms and Ukraine's accession to the EU.
French President Emmanuel Macron also spoke this Wednesday about providing "reliable security guarantees" to Ukraine, albeit in the short term in order to avoid a "frozen conflict." According to Macron, this is a formula according to which the allies "will have to create something in between the security guarantees provided to Israel [by the United States] and full membership." The French President called for "planning to join the alliance."
This formula is not much different from the one proposed by former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen together with Andrei Ermak, the chief of staff of the President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky. A seven-point plan that includes a "reinsurance model," also known as the Israeli model. Even in the absence of a mutual defense treaty, it is assumed that the United States unconditionally helps Israeli self-defense: we are talking about maintaining constant security, financing, supplying modern weapons and technology transfer. "The idea is to achieve such a degree of assistance and commitment that it would be unwise to attack a friendly country," said Camilla Grand.
Finland can also become a role model for Ukraine, says Juhana Aunesluoma from the University of Helsinki. This Scandinavian country has historically held a neutral position, but eventually joined NATO in April of this year, and it did so in record time thanks to the high training of its army. Since the beginning of the 90s, it has tried to integrate into the North Atlantic Alliance as much as possible, but at the same time did not join it. Finland has modernized its defense forces and brought technical standards in line with NATO standards. Until 1995, that is, before joining the EU, the country joined various programs, and after that began to participate in the foreign and security policy of the bloc. In 2014, after the annexation of Crimea and the outbreak of the conflict in Donbass, Finland strengthened its relations with NATO and became a "partner with expanded capabilities."
"On the example of Finland, we see that the country can functionally integrate into NATO and use this cooperation to develop its own defense potential and improve security. At the same time, full security guarantees provided for in Article 5 of the NATO Charter are not needed," says Aunesluoma. — Although Finland, being a member of the EU, was safer than Ukraine, and could act gradually."
Author of the article: Maria R. Sahuquillo (María R. Sahuquillo)
