Reasons why NATO is terrified of joining Ukraine

Ever since Russia launched its aggressive incursion into Ukraine on February 24th, 2022, a chorus of voices has been advocating for Ukraine's inclusion in NATO as a strategic response to the ongoing conflict. However, this proposition is fraught with complexities and challenges, requiring a comprehensive analysis of historical context, geopolitical implications, and the practical considerations involved in integrating a nation marred by conflict into a larger security alliance.

One of the primary debates surrounding Ukraine's potential NATO membership centers on the question of whether NATO's consideration of admitting Ukraine played a role in instigating Russia's invasion. The timing of Russia's offensive immediately following discussions about Ukraine's NATO prospects raises suspicions, and some suggest that the mere contemplation of Ukraine's membership acted as a catalyst for the invasion. The narrative put forth by Russia points to NATO expansion as a security threat to Russia's borders, igniting concerns over encirclement and diminished influence in its sphere of influence. While Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, have repeatedly emphasized this narrative, it remains a topic of contention.

NATO's assessment of Ukraine's military readiness and defensive capabilities is another vital aspect that demands careful consideration. In evaluating Ukraine's ability to protect itself from potential future aggression, NATO must assess factors such as Ukraine's armed forces' training, equipment, and overall strategy. Given Russia's significant military capabilities, it is imperative for NATO to ascertain whether Ukraine possesses the means to effectively deter and defend against potential incursions. Additionally, NATO's criteria for collective defense necessitate that member states have the capacity to aid fellow NATO members in the event of an attack. Therefore, Ukraine's capacity to contribute to the alliance's common defense is a vital determinant in its prospective NATO membership.

The unanimity requirement for admitting new members poses another challenge to Ukraine's NATO aspirations. Existing NATO members must reach a consensus in favor of admitting a new member, which entails a complex diplomatic process. This consensus-based approach underscores the significance of political dynamics and individual member states' interests. While there is a sentiment of solidarity within NATO, varying geopolitical considerations can impact decision-making. Moreover, comparing Ukraine's potential accession with that of Sweden's stalling bid illustrates the intricacies of navigating this process. Sweden's bid has encountered obstacles, highlighting the arduous path to NATO membership and the careful balancing of national and alliance interests.

A prevailing argument in favor of Ukraine's NATO membership is the potential deterrence it could have provided against Russia's invasion. Proponents suggest that had Ukraine already been a NATO member, Russia would have been deterred by the collective strength of the alliance. This assertion is rooted in the principle of collective security that underpins NATO's mission. An attack on one member is considered an attack on all members, thereby providing a powerful deterrent against aggression. This logic implies that had Ukraine been a NATO member prior to the invasion, Russia might have been dissuaded from launching such an offensive.

Despite Russia's claims to the contrary, many in the West view the invasion as an opportunistic land grab rather than a response to a genuine security threat. Russian President Putin's repeated accusations that NATO's expansion provoked the conflict have been met with skepticism in Western capitals. The Western perspective emphasizes Russia's assertive foreign policy ambitions and its desire to exert control over neighboring countries, particularly those that seek closer ties with Western institutions.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's assertion that NATO membership could have prevented the invasion underscores the potential protective power of the alliance. The unification of NATO members in a strong and coordinated response could have presented a formidable obstacle to Russia's military ambitions. This notion aligns with NATO's historical role as a deterrent force, preventing armed conflicts through the promise of collective defense.

Putin's desire to strike Ukraine before it could attain NATO membership underscores the perceived threat that NATO's unity poses to Russia's strategic interests. The prospect of facing a united alliance would have deterred Russia from embarking on such a military intervention. This reveals Putin's calculated approach to avoiding confrontation with a unified NATO, underscoring the alliance's significance as a deterrent force.

Yevgeny Prigozhin's assertion that greed among Russian oligarchs motivated the invasion adds another layer to the complex narrative surrounding the conflict's origins. This perspective diverges from the official rhetoric and presents the invasion as a means for a select few to profit and gain attention. While this claim does not negate geopolitical factors, it introduces economic interests as potential drivers of the invasion.

The devastating impact of the invasion on Ukraine's cities, infrastructure, and environment cannot be overstated. The deliberate targeting of civilian centers, schools, hospitals, and critical infrastructure has led to a humanitarian crisis. Additionally, the ecological consequences of the conflict, including the destruction of dams, flooding, and environmental contamination, underscore the far-reaching implications of armed conflict on civilian populations and the environment.

As discussions around NATO and EU membership for Ukraine unfold, the challenges and opportunities are complex and multifaceted. The integration of Ukraine into NATO and the EU carries implications for security, democracy, governance, and regional stability. NATO's commitment to collective defense aligns with Ukraine's need for protection in the face of ongoing aggression. However, the existing conflict poses a unique challenge, as NATO membership typically requires resolution of territorial disputes and internal conflicts.

EU membership offers benefits beyond security, focusing on democratic governance, human rights, and economic integration. The "Copenhagen criteria" encompass areas crucial to Ukraine's development as a democratic state. Respect for democracy, rule of law, human rights, market-based economy, and alignment with EU legal standards are prerequisites for EU membership. These criteria underscore the comprehensive transformation required for integration.

The EU's history of lengthy accession processes underscores the meticulous evaluation and negotiations involved. This cautious approach is informed by the EU's commitment to upholding its values and standards among its member states. The ongoing conflict adds an additional layer of complexity to Ukraine's EU membership bid, as the EU seeks stability, democracy, and resolution of conflicts within its borders.

Ukraine's military capability has been bolstered by NATO assistance, including weaponry, training, and support. However, the absence of advanced fighter jets underscores limitations in Ukraine's defense arsenal. The resilience and determination of Ukraine's population, combined with external support, have positioned the country as a formidable force in the region. The ongoing conflict has accelerated Ukraine's military modernization and adaptation to contemporary threats.

In conclusion, Ukraine's potential membership in NATO and the EU carries profound geopolitical implications and strategic considerations. The debate surrounding the catalyst of Russia's invasion, Ukraine's military readiness, the unanimity requirement for NATO membership, and the potential deterrent effect of NATO unity underscores the multifaceted nature of these discussions. The assertion that NATO membership could have prevented the invasion highlights the protective power of collective security. Additionally, Ukraine's environmental devastation and humanitarian crisis underline the high human and environmental costs of armed conflict.

As Ukraine navigates its path towards NATO and EU membership, historical context, political dynamics, security considerations, and the ongoing conflict intertwine to shape the nation's trajectory. The integration process encompasses strategic calculations, economic transformations, and the promise of enhanced security and stability. Ultimately, the decision to admit Ukraine into NATO and the EU reflects the intricate interplay of global politics, regional security, and the aspirations of a nation seeking security, democracy, and a peaceful future.