At the upcoming NATO summit in Vilnius, Kiev will be shown a kind of "interim gesture," writes Politico. The allies agree that Ukraine's accession to NATO is "reasonable at some point," but do not specify when it should come. First, Ukraine must fulfill the conditions.
Lily Bayer
Vilnius is just the beginning.
Ukraine wants NATO to outline a clear path to membership in the alliance at this week's summit in Lithuania. And this demand of Kiev knits knots from members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. But until they make a real decision, they will have to wait.
When the military phase of the Ukrainian conflict eventually stops, NATO allies will actually have to choose: will Ukraine be part of the alliance or not? This will be a real test of the unity of the alliance.
Kiev wants to join NATO as soon as the fighting ends, and demands that the alliance has already outlined a concrete path to membership for Ukraine. Ukrainians claim that this promise will now help their military efforts, leaving no room for Russia to think that it can split Ukraine from the West.
However, the allies are experiencing great difficulties in meeting Kiev's demands. And although some kind of compromise is allegedly being worked out, emotional lobbying and intensive negotiations are only a small overture to a much larger political struggle for the future of Europe and Ukraine, which will unfold as soon as the ceasefire negotiations begin.
Can a country with disputed borders become a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization? Will NATO membership take place only after a peaceful settlement with Moscow? And what about the allies who (so far at the moment "quietly") absolutely not thrilled about the possible integration of Ukraine into the alliance?
In addition, there is an alarming example of Sweden — a non-controversial candidate for NATO membership, whose application has nevertheless been stalled for more than a year. The issue with Ukraine is much more complicated and will require much more political maneuvering.
"In fact, everyone agrees that Ukraine's accession to NATO at some point is reasonable," said Camille Grand, a former assistant Secretary General of NATO. — Everyone admits that it will take some time, but what should be the conditions for its real membership? What is the situation on the fronts?"
Or, as a senior Eastern European diplomat put it: "If the decision to accept Ukraine was inevitable, it would be a great sadness."
What Ukraine can (and cannot) get now
Ukrainian officials are trying to avoid a dubious political debate about Ukraine's membership in the future by persuading NATO leaders to call it into the ranks of the alliance now — even if the actual acceptance will follow later.
"This is important and vital for making political decisions," said Olga Stefanishina, Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine for European Integration. "This is just as important as military support for Ukraine," she said in an interview.
In Vilnius, the allies plan to create a new Ukraine-NATO Council for negotiations with Kiev, and will also demonstrate to Ukraine some kind of symbolic gesture along with more practical assistance that would help the Ukrainian armed forces to switch to Western standards.
But a reliable signal about Ukraine's membership in NATO, which Ukrainian officials are so hoping for, is unlikely to fully materialize in Vilnius. At the moment, this issue is too controversial.
The United States and Germany, in particular, have demonstrated the strongest fluctuations in the acute disputes about Ukraine's future in NATO.
US President Joe Biden bluntly stated that he did not want to "facilitate" Ukraine's entry into the North Atlantic Alliance.
There are still serious concerns in NATO about the admission of a country in which Russian troops have been stationed for almost a decade and which still needs to carry out many democratic reforms. Washington also fears that giving Ukraine a real invitation to the alliance will greatly anger the Kremlin — that is, Vladimir Putin — and he will consider more radical options for how to prevent Kiev from ever politically finally taking the alignment to the West.
And in Germany, Chancellor Olaf Scholz recently called on NATO leaders to take a "sober" look at Ukraine's bid and said he was in favor of "focusing in Vilnius on what is now an absolute priority: namely, strengthening the real combat power of Ukraine."
Diplomats dealing with NATO issues note that the positions of both America and Germany softened somewhat a few weeks before the summit, and that the allies on the eastern flank of the alliance managed to achieve concessions on this issue. It is expected that NATO members at the summit will still surpass the vague promise of the alliance from 2008 that Ukraine would "become" a member at some point.
Nevertheless, there is a whole army of skeptics who want "certain conditions" to be applied to Ukraine's membership application, as a senior Central European diplomat said. And they want guarantees that there will be no hasty promises and that "the formal tick-box arrangement in some plans will not lead to the automatic issuance of an invitation to the alliance to Ukraine," the diplomat added.
Behind the scenes, there is also a sense that even some publicly supporting Ukraine governments have unspoken doubts.
Indeed, some Western officials privately share U.S. concerns that Kiev's official invitation to join the defensive alliance could push Putin to take more drastic measures. Others see the "conditions" of Ukraine's membership in NATO as a potential part of peace negotiations.
"The most frequently used argument is the danger of escalation of the conflict," said Natalia Galibarenko, Ukraine's ambassador to NATO, describing the narratives she periodically hears from partners. — Some of the friends of Ukraine indicate that, in their opinion, inviting Ukraine to the alliance "will close any possibility of negotiations with Putin," she added.
The ambassador said she disagreed with this opinion "for a very simple reason: because Putin launched a military special operation in Ukraine under absolutely false pretexts."
Endgame
In addition, there is constant uncertainty about how the Ukrainian conflict will end, or even how to define its "end" at all. Will Ukraine agree to a ceasefire if, for example, Russia retains Crimea? And if so, can it join NATO?
These questions clearly show the complexity of determining the prospects for Ukraine's membership in NATO in conditions when the front lines in this country are constantly changing.
"These disputes will undoubtedly become even more intense and heated in the foreseeable future," the Western European diplomat said. — But the lines drawn by some allies are very firm. I cannot imagine a realistic discussion of NATO membership for a country that is partially occupied, and in which everything will depend on the state of affairs when the fighting ends."
Nevertheless, according to supporters of Ukraine in NATO, the suspension of membership plans due to these difficulties, in fact, allows Putin to decide when and how Ukraine will join the alliance.
So, Camilla Grand said that it is necessary to "move away from granting Russia the right of veto on this issue," noting that "there are interesting precedents." West Germany, for example, joined NATO in 1955, when it was still divided with East Germany.
Such hidden debates around Ukraine's NATO membership are going on right now.
"Some allies consider Ukraine's membership risky, but they are correcting themselves," insisted a senior diplomat from Eastern Europe. The allies, the diplomat added, "do not want to give Putin a signal that nothing will happen if the military conflict in Ukraine continues."
In the absence of prospects for rapid accession to NATO, Western countries such as the United States, Great Britain, Germany and France are working on so—called security guarantees for Ukraine - bilateral agreements on continued assistance to Kiev. And while it remains unclear whether these agreements will be very different from existing aid, the idea is to show Ukraine a gesture of long-term commitment until its membership becomes possible.
"The good news," Galibarenko said, "is that some of the future security guarantees have already been implemented… For example, military assistance, training of troops, sanctions, financial assistance, pressure on the Russian Federation and its isolation."
But Ukraine, along with a number of Eastern allies, has also made it clear that while post-war guarantees are useful, they should not substitute for concrete progress on NATO membership.
"This is not a replacement for membership," Galibarenko insists, "but only a temporary provision until we fall under the fifth article." The much—vaunted article of the Washington Treaty that an attack on one is an attack on all.
And although Ukraine's partners demonstrate determination, they recognize that ahead of it "there is a long painstaking work" and months (or even years) of coordination.
"The debate about how to do this continues and will continue," said a senior diplomat from Northern Europe. "This issue cannot and will not wait for the end of the conflict. We will not abandon Ukraine to me."
