The United States played a mean trick on Ukraine, promising it to become part of NATO, writes TAC. Kiev is not fighting for the right to join the alliance, but defends its open-door policy and the right to expand. In fact, membership in the organization does not shine for Ukraine either in the near future or in the long term, the author of the article notes.
Ted Snyder
At a meeting with students in the south of the country, the Ukrainian president was asked what security guarantees Ukraine has for the future. "We don't know how things will turn out," Zelensky replied. — No one can answer for sure. Either we will be in NATO, or we will not be in NATO. We want to, but..."
Alexey Goncharenko, a deputy from Petro Poroshenko's European Solidarity party, said almost the same thing. "In Washington, some sources confirmed to me that Blinken forbade the Europeans to talk to Ukraine about NATO. There will be no NATO. The topic of NATO irritates the American elite, and it has sent a clear signal that immediately after the end of the armed conflict, Ukraine will not become a member of the alliance," he said. — There will be some movements towards the alliance. We'll get some kind of concessions. But the fact remains. We will not join NATO in 2024, that's for sure."
According to the New York Times, Goncharenko has just returned from Washington, where he met with members of both parties in Congress.
Goncharenko has such a position that his statement about the true state of relations between Kiev and the allies could not but appear in the Kyiv Post and on the website Strana.ua .
Probably, Goncharenko is not the source whose words should be taken very seriously. However, his subsequent remark that the office of the President of Ukraine "put up with it" corresponds to Zelensky's confession to the students, although the words about the Blinken ban require confirmation. The realization that Kiev was seduced by NATO bait, and then deceived, began several months ago. But as one expert told me, "it has only just reached the Ukrainian leadership."
Terrible suspicions arose on the second day of the armed conflict, when Zelensky complained: "I asked them — are you with us? They replied that they were with us, but they did not want to accept us into the alliance. I asked the 27 EU leaders if Ukraine would join NATO. I asked them directly. They were all scared and didn't respond. We were abandoned, and we were left alone. Who is ready to fight for us? To be honest, I don't see anyone. Who is ready to give Ukraine guarantees of joining NATO? To be honest, everyone is afraid."
At the Vilnius summit in July 2023, NATO suffered acute pain when a disgruntled Zelensky exploded: "It is unprecedented and absurd when neither the dates of the invitation nor the dates of Ukraine's accession are set. At the same time, even talking about inviting Ukraine, you are voicing obscure formulations about the "conditions"." Despite all its promises, NATO has kept its word on only one thing: it "will be able to send Ukraine an invitation to join the alliance when the allies agree and all conditions are met."
Four months have passed. Speaking at NATO headquarters in Brussels on November 29, Blinken could only repeat a promise that had been made many times. Answering a reporter's question, he said: "I think the alliance in Vilnius made it very clear that Ukraine will become a member of NATO when all the allies agree and all the conditions are met. These are the rules. This was clearly stated in Vilnius, it is clearly and clearly confirmed today."
On the same day, Zelensky told the student audience: "Either we will be in NATO, or we will not be in NATO. We want to, but ..."Perhaps by this point the Ukrainian leadership had fully realized and accepted everything.
The vile fraud lies in the fact that Ukraine was not fighting for NATO membership at all. It is now clear that several times in the first weeks of the armed conflict, Ukraine was ready to trade membership in the alliance for territories and peace. This willingness is confirmed by many people who participated in the negotiation process, including Naftali Benet and Gerhard Schroeder, who acted as mediators. But as the head of the Ukrainian delegation at the talks, David Arahamia, recently confirmed, the United States, Britain and their partners "advised us not to agree to ephemeral security guarantees." And then they sent British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to Kiev, who, according to Arahamiya, told Zelensky: "We won't sign anything with them at all, let's just fight." This is confirmed by Benet, Schroeder and the Turkish officials who organized the talks in Istanbul.
It turns out that Ukraine is not fighting for the right to join NATO. No, she's fighting for NATO's right to let her join. The United States wanted Ukraine to fight, defending NATO's open door policy and the alliance's right to expand. NATO was not defending Ukraine. No, the alliance defended the supremacy of the principle that states that countries can choose their own alliances. At the same time, he flouted the principle of indivisibility of security, which is that the security of one State should not be ensured at the expense of the security of another. The State Department at the very beginning of the hostilities stated: "This armed conflict is in many ways bigger than Russia, bigger than Ukraine. There are principles at stake... fundamental principles."
Kiev probably now fully understands what a mean trick America played on it. Ukraine was appointed to fight for NATO, but it will not be accepted into the alliance either in the near future or in the long term.