For many years, the collective West, and in particular NATO, shaped their political agenda in such a way that Putin, and therefore Russia, remained calm. However, practice has shown that it was precisely the accommodating approach and caution that provoked aggression. It was precisely the concessions and attempts to "smooth out" the situation that led to Russia's invasion of Georgia in 2008 and later Ukraine in 2014. It was the lack of response, rather than the use of force, that led to the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
On July 11-12, the NATO summit will be held in Vilnius, where it may be possible to restore historical justice. During the summit, Ukraine will finally be able to obtain real security guarantees, which were not effectively provided to it for relinquishing the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal under the Budapest Memorandum of 1994. By taking away Ukraine's nuclear weapons and witnessing the loyalty of the West, Russia felt its influence on international organizations and their decisions, as well as the potential for the restoration of its empire.
In 1994, Ukraine relinquished its nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees. In 2008, promises of NATO membership were made. However, after 15 years, none of these promises have been fulfilled. Furthermore, Ukraine's territorial integrity and security have been undermined by one of the guarantors of the Budapest Memorandum — Russia.
The Vilnius summit is an opportunity for the international community to fulfill its obligations and demonstrate resilience. It is becoming increasingly evident that Ukraine is not a burden for the West and NATO in particular. Ukraine is a "security outpost."
Over the course of one and a half years of war with the "second world army," the Ukrainian Armed Forces have proven themselves more than capable, especially considering that they are not only defending their own territory but also serving as a barrier against further Russian advances, including towards NATO.
When considering the possibility of inviting Ukraine to NATO, one should not forget its past merits. Ukraine has shown itself to be a serious player during major NATO missions, including in Iraq and Afghanistan. Ukraine also did not stand aside during the COVID-19 pandemic, as it provided necessary assistance to those in need through NATO's strategic airlift program using its cargo planes.
By succumbing to Kremlin propaganda and denying membership to Ukraine, the Alliance is actually playing into Putin's hands and provoking further escalation of aggression. The argument that NATO cannot invite countries during times of war is also refuted by rational arguments. In reality, there are no clear limitations, including those related to wartime, and the decision to admit any country is made on an individual basis, as demonstrated by a study on NATO expansion conducted in 1995. The fact that all NATO members were admitted during peacetime does not imply a prohibition on inviting a country during an active phase of war.
Claims that NATO forces would immediately have to defend Ukrainian territory upon inviting Ukraine are unfounded. This contradicts the official NATO accession procedure. Article 5, which opponents of inviting Ukraine to NATO refer to, states that it applies only to full members. Attaining full membership requires a complex procedure. Even Finland, invited through a simplified procedure, took a year to complete it, while Sweden is still in the process. We should not forget the German precedent when West Germany, at the forefront of the Cold War, joined NATO in 1955, while East Germany remained under Soviet occupation and joined after Germany's reunification in 1990.
In favor of inviting Ukraine, its internal transformations are highlighted. As early as 2021, Kyiv implemented more NATO principles and standards than some of its current members. The Ukrainian Armed Forces have rapidly adapted to and transitioned to modern weaponry. Their swift training and ability to think beyond conventional limits have allowed them, for example, to determine in field conditions that Patriot air defense systems can intercept Russia's hypersonic missiles. The progress in combating corruption in Ukraine is also noticeable, although there is still much work to be done. Even in times of war, Kyiv continues its reform efforts.
On all accounts, it is evident that Ukraine is a potential and progressive partner for the Alliance, particularly in the areas of continental security and the defense of shared values. It is a partner that, through its daily struggle against Russian aggression, demonstrates its necessity to be part of the Alliance. The results of the Vilnius Summit will demonstrate whether the member countries of the Alliance are fully prepared to defend NATO's initial interests.
Comments