Why Ukraine’s NATO membership seems out of reach

The top leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are set to meet in Lithuania tomorrow. Perhaps the most contentious and controversial issue on the docket in the two-day meet is Russia’s war in Ukraine – and Kyiv’s chances of gaining membership to the grouping. Let’s take a closer look at why Ukraine’s road to NATO is getting bumpier: A short history of relations Ukraine and the organisation first established ties in 1991 when a newly-independent Kyiv joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council. A few years later, Ukraine enrolled in the Partnership for Peace programme. In 1997, Ukraine and NATO signed the Charter on a Distinctive Partnership. This set up the NATO-Ukraine Commission (NUC) to increase cooperation. In 2008, then US president George W Bush vowed that Kyiv would ‘one day’ join NATO. The grouping also welcomed Ukraine and Georgia’s ambitions to join – which angered Russia.

In 2014, NATO cut off cooperating with Russia after its annexation of Crimea.

NATO then established a Comprehensive Assistance Package (CAP) for Kyiv in 2016. [caption id=“attachment_12849682” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] Graphic: Pranay Bhardwaj.[/caption] In June 2017, the Ukrainian Parliament made NATO membership a ‘strategic foreign policy and security’ objective. In 2019, Ukraine amended its constitution to reflect the same. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in 2020 approved a new National Security Strategy which aimed at joining NATO. In 2021, Russia declared that it was invading Ukraine. NATO has since stated that it stands with the people of Ukraine, while Zelenskyy has repeatedly pressed the West for admission into the grouping. ‘Don’t think there is unanimity’ While NATO membership offers ironclad “all for one, one for all” protection, the 31 countries must agree unanimously on letting Ukraine in, and they’re not united on this. Biden in an interview on Sunday said such matters would have to wait until the war has ended. “I don’t think there is unanimity in NATO about whether or not to bring Ukraine into the NATO family now, at this moment, in the middle of a war,” Biden told CNN. Biden pointed out that under Article 5 of the NATO charter, bringing Ukraine into the fold will mean war with Russia. “It’s a commitment that we’ve all made no matter what. If the war is going on, then we’re all in war. We’re at war with Russia, if that were the case,” Biden said. As per The New York Times, Biden added that for Ukraine’s membership to be considered a ‘rational path’ needs to be laid out and ‘other qualifications including democratisation would need to be met.’ The Telegraph quoted Biden as saying he had spoken to Zelenskyy “at length about this”. Biden added that the US would provide “security a la the security we provide for Israel.” “So I think we can work it out, but I think it’s premature to say to call for a vote now,” Biden added. Biden also spoke about the cluster munitions, saying it was a ‘very difficult decision’ “But the main thing is, they either have the weapons to stop the Russians now from their — keep them from stopping the Ukrainian offensive through these areas, or they don’t. And I think they needed them,” he told CNN. The US isn’t alone. Germany has also expressed similar fears. A NATO source told The Telegraph, “Berlin is stand-offish at the prospect of offering immediate membership.” “It wants a process and time to develop guarantees to essentially block membership. Berlin doesn’t want to see Vladimir Putin potentially test Article 5.” The source added that Germany would prefer to focus its attention on security assurances for Ukraine rather than NATO membership. [caption id=“attachment_12848702” align=“alignnone” width=“640”] Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly pushed for NATO membership[/caption] Sources told the newspaper that Kyiv would be offered ‘security guarantees’ and that the US, Germany and France were thought to be working on bilateral offers for Kyiv. These offers, which include weapons and training, would be signed via a “Memorandum of Understanding” endorsed by the EU and NATO.

Sources told the newspaper this is the “next best offer” after NATO membership.

This comes after German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in June said Ukraine and its allies were still “very far away” from being able to secure peace in the country but added any future Western security guarantees to Ukraine needed to be different from the status of European NATO members. “Given the current situation, it is not about establishing a membership … We all have to focus on how we as individuals can support Ukraine,” Scholz said at a news conference at the second meeting of the European Political Community (EPC) in Moldova. Asked on possible security guarantees towards the country, Scholz added: “They must be designed in such a way that they give Ukraine the security it needs against the danger of being attacked, that they also stabilise Ukraine at the same time, …, and of course it is always part of the security guarantee that it is taken seriously.” What do experts say? Some say US and Germany are right to be wary. “The United States should not guarantee Ukrainian security. Period,” said Ben Friedman, policy director at Defense Priorities, told CNN. “We shouldn’t do so now, via NATO or otherwise (through) some sort of bilateral security guarantees, and we shouldn’t do so as part of a peace deal.” “Guaranteeing Ukraine’s security would erode US security by increasingly the risk, obviously, of war with Russia,” he said. “That contains the risk, of course, of nuclear escalation, and for that risk I think the United States receives basically nothing of security value.” Orysia Lutsevych, a Ukraine expert at the think tank Chatham House told The Guardian NATO has a tricky balancing act. “If NATO promises Ukraine membership when the war ends, that in a way allows Russia to procrastinate in the war,” Lutsevych added. She suggested that alternative wording that hints at Ukraine joining when the security situation allows might help.

But others think chances of conflict with Russia are overblown.

More from Explainers

Donald Trump and Republicans are fighting over 'blue slips'. But what are they? Surat at standstill, exports halted: How Trump’s tariffs cast a pall over ‘Diamond City’

John Foreman, Britain’s defence attache to Moscow until last year, told The Guardian Biden “had misread Russian intent and overplays the risk of a widening of the conflict.” “I don’t believe Russia has either the capability or intent to do this. Leaving Ukraine neither in nor out of Nato will embolden Russia,” Foreman added. While NATO isn’t ready for membership just yet, it is helping to train and modernize its armed forces and security institutions to ensure that the country can take its place among NATO’s ranks after the war is over. The summit will see a new forum for consultations created — the NATO-Ukraine Council. It’s unlikely that any conclusions will be drawn in Vilnius, but the summit is an important moment for leaders to flesh out what those guarantees might look like. With inputs from agencies