The arguments for and against Ukraine joining Nato

The biggest and most controversial issue for Nato’s 31-nation alliance at its summit in Vilnius next week will be whether to offer fast-track membership of the organisation to Ukraine. Would this be a step too far or has the invasion by Russia made it inevitable? Why should Ukraine be allowed to join Nato? Nato has an “open door” policy, inviting all countries in Europe to join the alliance under the right circumstances. The conditions are strict and include a commitment to democracy, rule of law, adherence to required military standards and elimination of corruption. Ukraine has progressed significantly in all these areas but is at war with Russia. Under Nato strictures, no nation can be considered for membership while engaged in a territorial dispute. Therefore, membership for Ukraine, whether fast-track or not, has to be postponed until after the war is over. But can Ukraine be told that it will definitely join the alliance once the war ends? Yes, but with conditions. First of all, every member of the alliance has to agree. One vote against and the momentum for membership falters. This is what has happened with Sweden. Turkey has so far refused to agree to Sweden joining Nato because President Erdogan accuses the country of harbouring militants from the banned Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), regarded as enemies of the Turkish state since 1984. Secondly, it could potentially still take several years for Ukraine membership to come into force. North Macedonia which became an independent nation in 1991 had to wait 20 years. Is it not too risky to let Ukraine join Nato, even once the war is over? As far back as 2008 at the Nato summit in Bucharest, alliance leaders agreed that Ukraine and Georgia should be offered membership but without a specific timeframe. Even then, it caused quite a stir. President George W Bush wanted the alliance to offer a formal membership action plan (Map) to both countries. This would have obliged Nato to move ahead straightaway with preparations for adding them to the membership list. But Germany and France led the way in opposing Bush, and the final summit declaration merely promised membership. Now there is a war in Ukraine and Russia is ferociously opposed to Ukraine joining either Nato or the European Union. President Putin has said such a move would be a direct threat to Russia’s security. The question that has to be resolved is: would Ukraine’s membership of the alliance add to peace and stability in the wider Europe AND deter Russia from further aggression or would it lead to regional conflict? What has Ukraine done to deserve Nato membership? In many ways, the Kyiv government is already half way towards meeting membership requirements. The US-led 50-nation coalition has sent arms and weapons worth billions of dollars to Ukraine to help defend against the Russian invasion forces, and has also provided training and finance. As a result, the Ukrainian army is being transformed from an old Soviet force with obsolete weapons into a modern, western European-style military power with advanced combat systems. President Zelensky has also espoused western values and introduced anti-corruption policies. It probably wouldn’t take long for Nato’s entry requirements to be met. What if Ukraine joins Nato and then Russia launches another invasion? Under Article 5 of Nato’s Washington treaty signed in 1949, any member nation attacked by an outside aggressor has the right to request military assistance from the rest of the alliance. The only time the article has been enforced was in 2001 after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US. It led to the war on terror. But in Ukraine’s case, if the Russians launched an attack on Ukraine after it had become a fully-fledged member of the alliance, it would lead to direct conflict between Nato and Russia. Similarly, if Russia attacked Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia or Poland, for example, it would provoke a full-scale war.Would Russia seriously consider a war with Nato? Ukraine membership of the alliance would unquestionably be seen in Moscow as a hostile move. Nato’s gradual expansion eastwards in recent years has been viewed by the Kremlin as a growing threat to Russia’s security, even though the alliance’s open-door strategy was never aimed at undermining Russia or, indeed, making Moscow feel vulnerable. But Putin has always painted Nato’s strategy as a plot to weaken Russia. For him, putative membership of Ukraine in the alliance was the ultimate proof of Nato’s hostility towards Russia. It would also end his dream of reviving at least some of the former Soviet empire. But would Putin go to war with Nato? Washington has repeatedly warned that such a war would be calamitous. Seeing the way his so-called “special operation” in Ukraine has gone, it’s likely Putin has got the message.