The BDN Editorial Board operates independently from the newsroom, and does not set policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
A longstanding alliance has been getting even stronger, with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization gaining one new member and looking ready to accept another.
Finland has already joined NATO, and Sweden now looks poised to join as well. The question of Ukrainian NATO membership, or at least the timeline for that membership, is still being debated. This has proven understandably frustrating for Ukrainian leadership, but this continued deliberation is prudent nevertheless.
Ukrainian leaders arrived at this past week’s NATO summit in Lithuania hoping for a clear commitment and timetable for their accession to the alliance. After frustration bubbled over publicly in a Tuesday tweet from Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskyy, the tone shifted back to a more unified one at the end of the summit, with Zelenskyy touting security assurances and sounding much more understanding about the practical realities of his country joining NATO in the middle of an active conflict with Russia.
Ukraine of course is not to blame for Russia’s brutal invasion. But practically speaking, adding Ukraine to NATO in the middle of this conflict would seem all but guaranteed to draw NATO directly into the fighting. Under Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty, an attack on one member is considered an attack on all members and requires collective defense. With Russia’s active incursion against its neighbor, Ukrainian membership now could automatically trigger Article 5 action and basically escalate the U.S. and all of NATO from supporting Ukraine and its defense into active participants.
That looks like a recipe for World War III, and obviously cannot be on the table given the immediate circumstances. Even Ukraine recognizes this frustrating but undeniable reality.
“Nobody is willing to have a world war, which is logical and understandable,” Zelenskyy told reporters through an interpreter on Wednesday, as reported by Politico.
A common refrain during the summit among heads of state for current NATO countries, and in an official summit declaration, was that Ukraine’s future is in NATO. As it should be. But again, that will take time given the active conflict. As Sen. Angus King said Wednesday, the focus should be on continuing to support Ukraine in that conflict.
King, who was in Lithuania for the summit, addressed the question of Ukrainian NATO membership during a Wednesday press conference after returning to the U.S.
“It’s essentially a practical impossibility to integrate Ukraine into NATO today, or while this conflict is going on. Under the terms of the NATO treaty, we would then be at war with Russia,” King said.
King also said that providing a firm commitment now for Ukraine joining NATO once the war ends could provide “a kind of perverse incentive” for Russian President Vladimir Putin to extend the war in an attempt to prevent that membership from happening.
“Putting Ukraine on a fasttrack to membership could actually up the stakes for Putin and prolong the war,” King added.
Sen. Susan Collins addressed the question of Ukraine potentially joining NATO in a statement to the BDN editorial board.
“NATO should provide a pathway for Ukraine to join the alliance, but membership for Ukraine cannot occur while the war with Russia is underway because it would be perceived as a declaration of war against Russia by the members of NATO,” Collins said. “Had Ukraine joined NATO years ago, as President George W. Bush strongly urged, Russia likely would have been deterred from its brutal and unprovoked invasion.”
This brutal invasion emphasizes the importance of NATO and the collective security that the alliance provides. While Russia’s aggression and the active conflict presents a practical complication for Ukraine immediately joining NATO, it also emphasizes that, in the long term, Ukraine belongs in NATO.
