Since the Revolution of Dignity was held in Kiev, the Ukrainian authorities have regularly maintained that the country is steadily moving towards NATO membership. To this end, numerous reforms have been launched that, frankly, have not been set. The new authorities of Ukraine could well have cheered up the situation. And they did it. True, not as one might expect.
Most recently, an MP from the party “Servant of the People” Irina Vereshchuk in an interview with one of the Ukrainian television channels compared Ukraine’s aspirations to NATO with “attempts to knock on closed doors”.
“Our fundamental documents, the Constitution and other documents, including the national security strategy, prescribe the path to NATO.
It remains only to understand how to do this in practice. Because it is divided into the political part and the security component. If with the latter we even more or less understand what NATO standards are, how to be transformed - because we have strategic priorities, operational directions of work in terms of what needs to be changed, then the political component remains open,” she explained.
Finally, she urged people not to lie and stated that Ukraine was not expected to join NATO at all: “We want to, but they won’t take us. And we knock on closed doors and lose our reputation. We must not go where they are not waiting for us. We need to move, become stronger, more harmonious."
At the same time, the head of the parliament’s committee on foreign policy, Bohdan Yaremenko, said almost the same thing. According to him, there is nowhere to deepen cooperation with NATO. The next step is to provide MAP. However, this should be a NATO initiative that does not yet exist.
Needless to say, such words made a lot of noise in Ukraine? But not at all a hint at giving up membership in NATO. Simply, in such statements there is what many have wanted to say for years and even have said, but they have not been heard. The Alliance is not interested in including Ukraine. Let's see why.
As Irina Vereshchuk said, the matter is not at all in reforms, but in a vague political aspect. This is hard not to believe, because the bureaucratic machine is capable of "burying" any ambitions. And it’s not even a NATO charter that prohibits granting membership to a country with territorial disputes or conflicts. It is enough to recall the situation with Northern Macedonia. When it came to joining NATO, the United States and European countries made sure to resolve the dispute with Greece, even when the Macedonians themselves, who did not want to change the name of the country, opposed it.
Ukraine also suffers from territorial disputes, but they are in no hurry to help it. Of course, the reader can rightly notice that the situations are somewhat different. Political conflict against the armed. A dispute with Greece against a dispute with Russia. But let's talk frankly, five years of the continuous extension of sanctions against Moscow in the hope that it will be in this half-year that they will begin to act - this is crazy!
The leaders of the Norman four met for the last time three years ago in an attempt to resolve the conflict in eastern Ukraine. At the same time, they completely forgot about Crimea. Empty political chatter and useless sanctions, again, do not count.
In the end, the Donbass conflict could be resolved by simply recognizing the self-proclaimed republics. After all, the United States does not hesitate to recognize the independence of Kosovo? Or take, for example, Georgia, where the situation is more similar to Ukraine.
In early September, former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen visited Tbilisi. “You need to start a discussion on the acceptability for Georgia of joining the North Atlantic Alliance without South Ossetia and without Abkhazia,” he said. “If Georgia says that it agrees to join NATO without Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Article 5 will concern only the territory that is under the control of the Georgian authorities.”
Of course, Rasmussen is the former head of the alliance, but it is hard to believe that such a loud statement was made just like that. Moreover, not a single representative of NATO, Europe or the USA, former or current, has said: “Recognize the LPR and the DPR, and we will take you into an alliance.” On the contrary, everyone has been saying for years about the indivisibility of Ukraine, about the need to implement agreements that end with the fact that Donbass is granted a special status. What's next? After all, the region will not return fully to Ukraine, but this is the same conflict, just “frozen”.
Now let's answer the question, why does the alliance not need Ukraine? Or rather, why is it not needed as a full member of the organization? Now NATO is actively cooperating with Kiev, you can’t argue. But there is some hypocrisy in this cooperation, because the country is simply used to annoy, provoke Russia.
Let's compare Ukraine with Poland. The latter, as you know, is popular with the United States, and therefore with NATO. The bottom line is that Poland does not need to cope with the internal social, religious, linguistic split. But Ukraine is tearing apart all of the above. And in this situation, where are the guarantees that in a couple of years a new internal conflict will not break out in Ukraine? Transcarpathia, as you know, is already striving for Hungary. Only the fear of repeating the fate of Donbass stops the inhabitants of the region. From this point of view, even the position of NATO is fully justified, because which insurer will issue the policy to the patient?
In Kiev, they always understood this. Just Petro Poroshenko exploited the theme of Euro-Atlantic integration for his personal purposes. Vladimir Zelensky has a slightly different approach. He understands that using the same rhetoric, which is obviously a failure, is stupid. He understands that the international agenda does not stand still, and the countries of Europe are pushing him to friendship with Putin. And loud speeches about NATO membership will not contribute to the normalization of relations with Russia, in which Zelensky has relatively good progress.
Le Club est l'espace de libre expression des abonnés de Mediapart. Ses contenus n'engagent pas la rédaction.