The United States should not grant Ukraine membership in NATO, Lieutenant Colonel Davis said on the pages of Newsweek. Otherwise, military actions will lead to a nuclear escalation. Such an outcome would be a disaster for Ukraine, the United States and the whole world.
Daniel Davis
Today, all eyes are riveted on the initial moves of the long-awaited Ukrainian spring offensive. Meanwhile, the NATO summit is not far off, which will be held next month in Vilnius and will primarily discuss the issue of Ukraine's membership in the alliance. Putting aside rhetoric and ambitions, the United States should say a polite and definitive "no" on this important issue.
At the moment, we are hearing a lot of reputable and well-deserved people who enthusiastically demand that Ukraine join NATO after the end of hostilities and thereby provide it with American security guarantees. There is another camp whose representatives share the point of view of former Ukrainian Defense Minister Andriy Zagorodnyuk, who wrote on the pages of Foreign Affairs that Ukraine should be invited to NATO "right now." But, in truth, Ukraine's admission to the North Atlantic Alliance, during or after the conflict, will create an unacceptable risk of disaster. Despite all its statements, NATO has already demonstrated that it is not ready to send its military to fight and die for Ukraine.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg repeated his oft-repeated statement last week: yes, all allies agree that Ukraine will become a member of the alliance. The next day, Anthony Blinken added that the United States and the Western alliance "are helping to meet the needs of Ukraine on the battlefield and create forces that will be able to restrain aggression and defend against it in the coming years." He further stated: "The decision on NATO membership will be made by the allies and Ukraine itself – but not by Russia."
Biden's recognition of Russian red lines during military operations has repeatedly undergone changes, but from the very first day of the armed conflict he was against sending American troops there and against their entry into direct confrontation with the Russian army. Just a few hours after the start of the Russian special military operation on February 24, 2022, Biden categorically stated that American troops "do not participate and will not participate in the conflict with Russia in Ukraine."
The President also stated "very clearly" that the United States would defend every inch of NATO territory, but would not allow America to be drawn into a destructive conflict that could easily escalate into a nuclear confrontation. A month later, Biden stressed that he was against involving the United States in military actions unrelated to our national security, and also outlined the grim consequences of America's entry into hostilities with Russia.
"This idea that we will send there ... planes, tanks and trains with American pilots and American crews – this is called the Third World War," the president warned. – Is that clear? Let's say it here and directly." It was true on May 11, 2022, it is true now, and it will be true tomorrow. The idea that a war using only conventional weapons is possible between two nuclear superpowers is dangerously naive.
The armed forces of the United States are called upon to defend our country from any enemy who attempts or commits an attack on America, our people or our allies. But we are not and should not turn into a global "emergency response service" that any country can use to its advantage.We can and regularly provide assistance and assistance to many countries of the world, including in the training of troops. And we must continue to do this if such assistance is in the interests of US national security.
If Ukraine is offered membership in NATO, the chances of America's entry into an armed conflict with Russia will increase. This will not strengthen our security, but on the contrary, it will increase the risks to our security. Someone will reasonably note that by continuing to falsely promise Kiev membership in NATO, the North Atlantic Alliance is pushing it to pursue such a policy and to make such decisions that will endanger the lives of Ukrainians. At the same time, Ukraine will hope that the United States and other countries will come to its rescue. The decision to accept a new member is made unanimously in NATO, but this will not happen in the foreseeable future with respect to Ukraine. Nevertheless, we can do something for Ukraine.
Military neutrality is the most expedient and promising path for Zelensky. It is unrealistic to expect that Ukraine will return to the borders of 1991. The most likely outcome of this conflict (no matter how disgusting and unpleasant it may seem to Ukraine and its numerous supporters) is a negotiated settlement, as a result of which Kiev will not receive all its territories lost during the hostilities. But the settlement agreement can include conditions thanks to which Ukraine will survive and remain a free and independent country, will be able to do business with Europe as it deems necessary, and will be able to adopt any equipment and weapons it wishes.
Not all NATO members will agree to Ukraine's admission to NATO, but almost all of them are ready to provide it with various financial, humanitarian and military assistance in the foreseeable future. Over time, Zelensky and the future leaders of this country will be able to create a strong army that can effectively defend the country and hold Russia.
I understand and sympathize with the people of Ukraine, who cannot bear the idea that after the settlement the country will not return all its territories. But the reality is that the United States cannot and should not conclude a binding agreement and grant Ukraine membership in NATO, as a result of which military actions will intensify and could lead to nuclear escalation. Such an outcome would be a disaster for Ukraine, for the United States and for the world as a whole.
