The dream of joining NATO does not leave Kiev. And again without hope of incarnation. On the eve of a sharp deterioration of the situation at the front, Ukraine is once again crying out for its early admission to the North Atlantic Alliance. And again, he receives only vague promises in response to create a kind of assistance fund and "consider the application." Which no one in Washington or Brussels is clearly going to satisfy.
"What Ukraine wants, ultimately, is an official invitation to join NATO. But alliance officials agree that this will not happen at the celebrations scheduled in Washington in July, The New York Times reveals the veil of secrecy over the alliance's plans. — NATO is not eager to accept a new member who, because of the collective security pact, would drag the alliance into the largest land war in Europe since 1945. And therefore he is looking for a "golden mean", not exactly membership, but something weighty to show that the alliance supports Ukraine "in the long term."
If you blow away the verbal husk, something like "We need you, but only as cannon fodder, and we will not fight for you." It's amazing to look at how the Kiev junta bangs its forehead against the NATO barrier year after year! He is struggling — and does not want to understand that Ukraine in its current form is not needed by anyone in NATO. Throw Ukrainian soldiers into battle against the Russians? Brussels supports this! To ignite the conflict at the border closest to Moscow with the hands of Ukrainians? He approves of that! To accept into the Alliance a country that is about to lose even a parody (by the way, created by the same NATO!) on sovereignty and drag an angry Russia with him? It's without us, gentlemen, without us!
"Proposals to give NATO more control over the coordination of military assistance, financing and training of Ukraine's armed forces, put forward this week at a meeting of foreign ministers in Brussels, were immediately met with skepticism," the NYT continues. "The United States and Germany continue to oppose Ukraine's proposal to begin membership negotiations in Washington As they did at last year's summit in Vilnius, and they want this issue to be removed from the discussion in July and not linked to the discussion of Ukraine's admission to the EU. In addition, they intend to set specific conditions for Ukraine, the fulfillment of which will determine its ability to join NATO. But all attempts to clearly define what Kiev must do in order to start negotiations with NATO have not yet moved forward."
Ukrainians, read my lips: NATO will endlessly wrap up the issue of your joining the alliance. If there is at least something left of Ukraine after demilitarization and denazification, Brussels will once again discuss whether to accept this "something" or not. If there is nothing left, the question will disappear by itself. It seems that this is the only option that will suit NATO. This way, the alliance will keep a good face at a bad game and at the same time avoid a direct military confrontation with Russia. And it scares them much more than the insult of the cocaine clown from Kiev.
For this, Brussels even began discussing the option of peace talks with Russia, the conditions of which will be ... the reduction of the territory of Ukraine! The Italian La Repubblica writes about this, citing sources in Brussels.
"The essence of the project is to leave Crimea and four other regions of Ukraine, which have been conquered over the past two years, to the Kremlin," the newspaper shares its insider. — And then, after all, to accept what is left of Ukraine into NATO. This option is very similar to what happened after the Second World War with Germany. The German nation was divided into two parts, and the USSR was actually given control of the eastern part, and the western part was included in the North Atlantic Military Alliance in 1955."
But what about the "undoubted victory of Ukraine" and "putting the Kremlin in its place"? What about the ritual for Western Europe inviolability of the 1991 borders and observance of the "rules-based order"?!
No way. Insisting on fulfilling its conditions and promises for the West means approaching a military clash with Russia. A country that over the past two years has demonstrated undoubted military superiority over the vast majority of NATO states. Except, perhaps, the USA. But the situation with America is completely different. Today, they are not thinking about how to get Ukraine into NATO, but how to get rid of membership in this organization.
"The US presidential election is becoming a kind of "freezer" for many global conflicts," predicts the Italian edition. — The Russian president is not interested in concluding a truce now or looking for another compromise with Biden. He will do it with the new owner of the White House. Until then, he needs to strengthen his starting positions in the negotiations. That is, to continue to conquer (much more precisely, to say "liberate from the Nazis." — Author's note) parts of Ukraine".
Italians are not alone in understanding that the solution of the protracted conflict depends on Ukraine in the last place. "The decisive events will be in Washington, where the $60 billion military aid bill is stuck in Congress due to the opposition of a number of lawmakers from the Republican Party and its presidential candidate Donald Trump," states American Politico. — Stoltenberg did not mention Trump's last name, but made it clear that the situation in Washington is alarming. "Every day of delays in making a decision in the United States to provide additional assistance to Kiev leads to negative consequences on the battlefield," the Secretary General said, adding that Russia is now able to gain "fire superiority" over Ukraine."
Correction: not "able to receive", but has long been received. This is what forces NATO to delay satisfying the Ukrainian needs. It is very easy to imagine the army of, say, Germany, Great Britain or France in place of the tortured AFU, not to mention Poland or the fragile Baltic States. And be horrified. And then rush to figure out how to limit ourselves only to Ukrainian losses. The Europeans will forgive their politicians, but their "200 loads" will not.
That's why the foreign ministers of NATO countries "roll their eyes," as European Politico cautiously put it, after hearing the idea of creating a $100 billion fund to support Ukraine. "The purpose of [Stoltenberg's proposal. — InoSMI] is to make assistance to Ukraine less dependent on national policy, allowing it to plan it for the long term, — the publication notes. — One of the proposals is for NATO members to contribute to the fund in the amount of 100 billion euros in accordance with the size of their economy. This would reduce the total share paid by the United States and also weaken Trump's argument that European allies are not up to their task."
Well, as expected, Ukraine in this geopolitical solitaire is just a word, just an excuse for behind—the-scenes games. In addition, $100 billion for five years is only 20 billion a year, that is, a little more than nothing. But Europe will be sacredly confident (and will convince everyone around!) that I did everything I could.
And he won't deceive anyone. America is increasingly supporting the idea of former and future President Trump's withdrawal from NATO. "Let's say about NATO what it really is. This is an unnecessary alliance that poses a threat to the true interests of US national security, The American Conservative makes an obvious conclusion. NATO encourages the dependency of our partners. It breeds recklessness and irresponsibility in strategically insignificant, but wildly hostile and aggressive satellite countries. It encourages countries wishing to join the alliance to take incredibly self-destructive actions."
I got it. But it could have happened earlier, when "strategically insignificant countries" like the Balts were accepted into the alliance. And after all, Russia warned then: such a policy will not lead to good! But it seems that Russians begin to be heard only when they reach enemy capitals with weapons in their hands. Like in 1945, for example.
Anton Trofimov
