NATO tells Ukraine its road to membership is “irreversible”
Nato’s leaders gathered in Washington this week to overcome a big gap in their Ukraine strategy—between the principle that Ukraine is free to join the alliance with no veto by Russia and the reality that few are ready to let it in while it is at war with Russia. That proved impossible, so nato made do with lots of smaller commitments of weapons, money and training, and many warm words for Ukraine.
A twisted metaphor stood out: the allies had built “a bridge” to nato membership. This was a “strong, robust, well-lit” thing, declared Antony Blinken, the American secretary of state, adding that it was “short”, too. In their communiqué, moreover, the allies declared that Ukraine’s progress towards nato was “irreversible”.
Diplomatic phrases cannot stop the brutality of a war now in its third year. Arriving in Washington for what was intended to be a celebration of nato’s 75th birthday, leaders were greeted by news of a Russian missile strike on a children’s hospital in Kyiv on July 8t. Of some comfort in the short term were weapons for air defences. Allies announced they would provide five more medium-range systems—four American-made Patriot missile batteries and one Franco-Italian SAMP/T system. America, Denmark and the Netherlands were also delivering f-16 fighter jets that would soon be flying over Ukraine. There was no sign, however, that America was yet prepared to let Ukraine use atacms missiles to strike at airfields deep inside Russia.
nato promised to provide at least €40bn ($43bn) in military aid in the coming year—short of the multi-year support several allies had advocated. About 20-odd countries have signed their long-term bilateral security assistance deals with Ukraine. The summit also decided to transfer part of the job of co-ordinating arms supplies and training for Ukraine from the Pentagon to a new nato headquarters.
The leaders celebrated the longevity of the alliance. Born in the cold war, it has become the world’s most enduring military pact, outlasting even the Delian League of ancient Greek city-states, noted Jens Stoltenberg, the outgoing secretary-general. In an echo of the cold war, America and Germany announced that, from 2026, America would begin “episodic deployments” of new long-range missiles for exercises in Germany. They include sm-6, Tomahawk and “developmental” hypersonic weapons with a range that would have been banned under the now-defunct Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty.
All this highlights the fact that nato membership remains a binary question. Some countries are allies, enjoying the protection of Article 5, which holds that an attack on one is an attack on all, backed by America’s conventional and nuclear might. And other countries are not allies. nato leaders were at pains to say that all the help they are giving Ukraine does not “make NATO a party to the conflict.” For Mr Stoltenberg, membership is for the day after the war, to seal any peace.
nato’s promises about Ukraine’s future were weakened by caveats, for example, the demand that it make further “democratic, economic and security reforms”. Moreover, Ukraine would be invited to join nato only “when allies agree and conditions are met”. The biggest ally, President Joe Biden, is anyhow sceptical. Earlier this year he said he opposed “the natoisation of Ukraine”. In his opening speech he did not mention Ukraine’s membership at all.
Given Mr Biden’s political weakness at home, all know that Ukraine’s road to membership is all too reversible if Donald Trump returns to the White House. The Republicans’ presumptive nominee has criticised aid to Ukraine. Moreover, if Mr Trump is serious about his threat not to protect allies who don’t spend enough on defence, there might not be much of an alliance left for Ukraine to join.
The spectre of Mr Trump haunted the summit. Mr Biden invoked the spirit of Ronald Reagan, an earlier Republican icon, to underscore the importance of the alliance. Mr Stoltenberg attributed to Mr Trump the surge of allies—23 of the 32—who would reach or exceed the target of spending 2% of GDP on defence this year. “The clear message has had an impact,” he said. The transfer of logistical and training functions to nato was intended in part to protect the process from the whims of a second Trump administration. The idea of providing long-term assistance to Ukraine is intended to tell the Kremlin it cannot outlast nato, for instance by holding out for Mr Trump to impose a diplomatic settlement favourable to Russia.
The broader pitch to Republicans is that nato is central to America’s global power and its effort to confront China. The nato summit—which was to be joined by leaders from Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand—expressed “profound concern” about China and issued a stern warning about its support for Russia’s military industry. China, they said, could not “enable the largest war in Europe in recent history without this negatively impacting its interests and reputation.” ■
To stay on top of the biggest European stories, sign up to Café Europa, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.