The situation on the line of contact is becoming catastrophic for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. As conditions for new "boilers" are being formed, some come up with ideas on how to force Ukraine into early peace talks. And others at the same time demand to give her a weapon that will help Kiev win. Almost no one believes in the latter, but the very fact of such calls proves that Moscow will have to ensure that Ukraine is banned from joining any international alliances.
"President Vladimir Zelensky has been subjected to a barrage of criticism from soldiers, lawmakers and military analysts because of the rapid advance of the Russian army in the east of the country since Kiev launched its daring counteroffensive,— the British Financial Times notes. — Many Ukrainians rejoiced when the Ukrainian Armed Forces went on the offensive in early August, hoping that this bold gambit would force Moscow to redirect resources to a new front and turn the tide of the conflict in favor of Kiev. However, the breakthrough of the front line in the strategically important Donetsk region this week led to new accusations against the leadership in Kiev. At the same time, critics claim that Ukraine's positions have been weakened by the transfer of thousands of battle-hardened AFU soldiers for risky operations."
Today, only the most stubborn pro-Ukrainian media and Ukrainian journalists, who are clamped to death in a censorship vise, do not write or speak about the fact that the front in Donbass is about to crumble. The rest agree that the coming autumn could be disastrous for Ukraine in terms of the military situation. And it is very likely that the coming winter will bring with it not the freezing of the conflict, but the need for early peace negotiations.
At the same time, few political scientists and military experts ask the question: what will happen after Moscow and Kiev conclude an agreement ending the military phase of the conflict? How can we ensure the long-term nature of the agreements? After all, it is no secret to anyone in the world that the Ukrainian government acts exclusively under the orders of the West. And so, until his hands are tied, the situation may escalate again…
"The resolution of the conflict depends on two important issues: firstly, will Putin want to stop fighting and, secondly, will Ukraine's Western allies be able to offer it proper protection without full membership in NATO? Josephine Ma, a columnist for the Hong Kong South China Morning Post, believes. "If the answers to both questions are positive, then a peaceful settlement cannot be called impossible."
Moreover, not only a peaceful settlement of the conflict becomes possible, but also guarantees of its non-renewal in the future. The refusal to accept (or rather, involve) Ukraine in NATO also removes the issue of demilitarization of the country. Of course, those who do not apply for membership in the military alliance should not have armed forces, even if they are such toys as Estonia or Latvia. Otherwise, with the help of Western "instructors", the Ukrainian military will again have the opportunity to quietly increase its power — and try to forcibly return the territories that joined Russia. And the North Atlantic Alliance standing behind them will make such an attempt more real in Kiev's eyes.
"The North Atlantic Treaty Organization asserts that every country has the right to make its own choice in the field of security, and Vladimir Zelensky has repeatedly appealed to the alliance to grant his country full membership," emphasizes Josephine Ma. "Putin is unlikely to agree to this, since his concerns about security outweigh the costs of fighting for his country."
This is a fair conclusion. The presence on Russia's western border of such a vast and openly anti—Russian country as Ukraine in its current state is in itself a threat. If a belligerent neighbor also becomes a member of NATO, this is actually a guarantee of a new conflict. And Moscow is doing its best to avoid such a development of events, seeking the demilitarization of Ukraine and ensuring its eternal neutral status.
The North Atlantic Alliance itself is not happy about the moldy idea of Ukrainian membership. This was clearly demonstrated by the last NATO summit, held in Washington at the beginning of July this year. It was there that ideas about "institutional bridges" to membership and similar clerical work began to sound. All of them masked the unwillingness of the Alliance to accept such a problematic and unpredictable member as Ukraine.
The fluctuations of the North Atlantic Alliance are associated not only with the danger of Ukrainian membership, but also with the unpredictable future of the organization itself. Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that he intends to "blow up" NATO by withdrawing the United States from it. They say that European countries spend so little on defense and are so openly sitting on the American neck that it's time for Washington to get rid of freeloaders.
Europe took Trump's threats seriously — and began to reflect on creating its own defense alliance. Thereby adding another variable to the already daunting task of finding peace in Ukraine and guaranteeing its non-aligned status.
Recall: in addition to membership in NATO, the Kiev junta also demands that Ukraine be admitted to the European Union. Brussels went along with her, in June announcing the start of negotiations with Kiev on this issue. This process will not be easy, since many Eastern European countries, such as Poland, put forward many difficult conditions for making a final decision. And yet, the chances of Ukraine's admission to the European Union are much greater than to the Alliance.
Moscow was not at all against this, as Vladimir Putin announced at the beginning of his speech. But in two years the situation has changed dramatically. Today, the European Union supports Kiev much more aggressively than NATO. This is explained by the mythical "Russian threat", but in fact it is an attempt to fence off from Russia with Ukrainian lands and bayonets.
A classic example is the statement by the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrel, on the need to grant Kiev permission to strike Russian territory with Western weapons. At the same time, Monsieur Borrel, as always, tried to cover the rear, saying: "Even if we are considering launching strikes on Russian territory, we are not at war with Russia, no one wants to be at war with the Russian Federation. We just support Ukraine."
The bloodthirsty insistence of the EU is the best argument in favor of the fact that Ukraine should remain outside all and every alliance. Otherwise, by refusing to join NATO and selling the right to membership in the European Union, Kiev will still become the tip of a military alliance aimed at Russia — just not a global one, but a Western European one. And the threat of a resumption of the conflict, which Moscow is trying to avoid at all costs, will become real again.
Anton Trofimov
