The Realpolitik behind relations between NATO and Ukraine

Historical Cooperation

NATO- Ukraine affinity began in 1991 when the latter joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, now called the Euro- Atlantic Partnership Council. The council was a platform for dialogue and political cooperation between NATO members and its Cold War period adversaries, in other words, countries tied with the Warsaw Pact (1955) under the leadership of the Soviet Union. Three years ahead, independent Ukraine turned out to be the first Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) country to become part of NATO's Partnership for Peace Program which entails the establishment of trust and friendship between NATO and other European countries as well as states of the former Soviet Union. Further to enhance transparency and build a stronger line of communication, NATO assembled its first-ever Information and Documentation Center in 1997 in the capital city of Ukraine, Kyiv. Later that year, they signed the 'Charter on a Distinctive Partnership', subsequently formed the NATO- Ukraine Commission taking their partnership to the next level. In 2002, NATO held a summit to expand its membership, and during that same period, the NATO- Ukraine Commission adopted a Ukraine- NATO Action Plan expressing Ukraine’s aspiration to join the NATO forces. All the efforts culminated in 2008 with the top leadership of Ukraine proposing to be part of NATO’s Membership Action Plan. Moreover, a national referendum was in effect in Ukraine wherein the majority of the population out rightly supported the move to join NATO. However, at the NATO summit in Bucharest in April the same year, it was announced that Ukraine would not be offered membership yet.

The complex dynamics shared between NATO and Ukraine have gone through various ups and downs up until the most recent Alliance Summit held in June 2021 in Brussels. NATO and Ukraine have collaborated under the framework of the Annual National Program including numerous joint military exercises. Ukraine has always overtly accepted that NATO's membership is critical to its security and defense requirements. On the other hand, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg in his recent statement said that Ukraine is a well-suited candidate for NATO membership, albeit there are other tangents involved in the decision [1]. Additionally, the cooperation between the two has deepened over the period and is mutually beneficial as Ukraine actively contributed to myriad missions and operations of NATO.

The Russian Tangent

Ukraine shares its eastern border with Russia; moreover being the former Soviet Republic, the country has deeply embedded social and cultural relations with the Russians. However, there exists a long-standing rift between Russia and Ukraine due to the increasing closeness of the latter with the western institutions. Russia has always resisted this changing behavior of Ukraine. Earlier in 2014, Ukraine ousted their pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych leading to distrust amongst the Russians [2]. Subsequently, it resulted in the annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in the same year and capturing of large swathes of Ukraine’s eastern region known as Donbas. Although, Russia argues that the annexation is justified as historically Crimea is part of the Russian Federation, however, experts suggest it was to hinder Ukraine's western inclinations. Since the days of annexation, Russia is demanding assurance from Ukraine that it will never be part of NATO. Russia’s intransigent stance is against the principles of the Helsinki Final Act of 1975 wherein Russia vowed to respect 'the right to belong or not to belong to international organizations, to be or not to be a party to bilateral or multilateral treaties including the right to be or not to be a party to treaties of alliance' [3]. In short, Russia does not bode well when the situation evolves to be disadvantageous to its interests. The western alliance globally condemned Russia's illegitimate annexation of Crimea and destabilized the region. Economic sanctions were imposed upon Russia followed by a profound struggle between the western and eastern blocs. However, NATO members also fear that granting membership to Ukraine would lead to enforcement of Article 5 i.e., collective confrontation against Russia, therefore, a high probability of a Third World War.

The Russia- Ukraine conflict is still a reality and the Russians are a major threat lingering over the eastern border of Ukraine. The satellite images circulated depict a possibility of a full-fledged Russian invasion in 2022. Moscow's intentions are highly discernible to the world, it aims to establish a new world order and demolish the present international order led by the western forces. The main motive is to get rid of NATO and the EU from its backyard and weaken their influence. Ukraine is at the forefront of this squabble and the recent deployment of about 100,000 Russian forces around the Ukrainian border outlines the same. The tensions over Ukraine have brought the relations between Russia and NATO to a new low.

The Response

The Russian government has outrightly denied any kind of invasion planned against Ukraine. On the other hand, it accuses the Ukrainian administration of bolstering their military factions by stationing around 125,000 personnel in the east to ambush the areas controlled by the Russian- backed separatists. At present, Russia and Ukraine are involved in a ‘propaganda war’ wherein Russia lays the blame for the Ukrainian military build-up on the NATO allies. President Putin has overtly conveyed to the western powers especially the United States that, "Russia would not retreat or sit idle while the NATO countries are out there supplying Ukraine with weapons.” Russia wants the plausibility of further expansion of NATO towards the east which includes Ukraine, Georgia, or other former Soviet states to end. The point of contention between Ukraine and Russia includes western military exercises in the Black Sea with support of Ukraine, an ‘anti- Russian project’ undertaken by the current government of Ukraine, and the fall out of the 2015 Minsk peace agreement which dealt with a ceasefire in the eastern Ukraine conflict [4]. Moscow aims to pull back Ukraine under its influence, albeit an alternative strategy is to opt for stringent measures to hinder economic reforms in the country making it an unattractive or non-beneficial partner for the West.

The response of NATO, the western military alliance, is defensive. Its chief has stated that priority must be given to secure the Ukrainian democratic development and reinforcing the army to bolster its ability to defend the Russian forces. The NATO allies have shown full support to Ukraine's fight against the Russian occupation. They have urged Russia to back-pedal its military from in and around Ukraine, to not restrict free navigation through the Black Sea, as well as stop channeling monetary and military support to the separatists within Ukrainian borders. Since the beginning of the crisis in 2014, NATO- Ukraine Commission has met time and again to deliberate on Russian threats and the feasible countermeasures. The West is committed to retaliating in case of Russian provocation, for instance, President Joe Biden has vowed to impose additional economic sanctions upon Russia along with providing aid to the Ukrainian military. Also, the United Kingdom is helping out Ukraine in constructing two naval bases, at Ochakiv on the Black Sea and Berdyansk on the Sea of Azov. Another tactic used to push Russia away is to prevent the functioning of the Russian Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline in Germany, resulting in huge economic damage to the Russians. The recent telephonic conversation between the leaderships of the US and Russia entails that any further economic sanctions would completely ‘rupture’ the ties between the two countries [5]. President Biden advised Russia to de-escalate tensions with Ukraine and adopt diplomatic routes. Whereas President Putin has made it clear that Russia wants a written commitment that Ukraine will never be permitted to become a member of NATO and that western military equipment would never be deployed in former Soviet states. However, the historical ties between Russia and Ukraine are breaking down due to the ongoing Russian aggression claiming the lives of more than 13,000 people. This has coaxed the Ukrainian administration to stay aloof from Moscow and solidify relations with Europeans and trans- Atlantic institutions. This is an extraordinary and complex situation, as Ukraine is a sovereign and independent state that must have the right to choose the trajectory of its foreign policy without any Russian blockades.

Conclusion

Ukraine surely deserves NATO membership but is it likely in the near future is still a conjecture. In present times, Ukraine must continue to deepen its cooperation with the allied powers. The country must prepare itself in terms of defense and security as well as embrace democratic values and an open market economy. Thereafter, when NATO is equipped to accept Ukraine as a member, the latter would be in its prime and appear as a pleasing partner. NATO-Ukraine cooperation covers a wide range of spheres such as political, technical, military, scientific, economic, and ecological [6]. Ukraine has a realization of the potential of NATO in the global order; its practical experience is vital in maintaining national security, compatibility between civil and military units, and response to civil emergencies. At the same time, NATO admits to this mutually beneficial relationship as closer ties with Ukraine or any other former Soviet state would aid the western alliance in standing its foreground against the Russian catastrophe. The meeting between the Foreign Ministers of NATO members was held in Riga recently to discuss the escalation near Ukrainian borders. Stoltenberg has sent out a warning from the platform that, "although Ukraine is not a member of NATO, hence it does not warrant the same level of counterattack as an ally, but NATO members would back up Kyiv through economic sanctions, financial sanctions, and political reactions [7].” In conclusion, the strategy in place to retort all Russian actions is to exert pressure rather than a military strike with no risk of human casualties on the field. There is no clarity on the Russian-Ukraine standoff, additionally, the US and Russia are at a stalemate wherein neither President Biden is acceding to the Russian demand of not crossing the 'red line', nor President Putin has promised to revert the amassed troops from Ukraine’s borders.

References:

[1] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_37750.htm

[2]https://www.npr.org/2021/12/14/1064018450/tensions-over-ukraine-come-as-relations-between-russia-and-nato-are-at-an-all-ti

[3]https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/06/06/natos-ukraine-challenge/

[4]https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56720589

[5]https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/12/31/biden-and-putin-trade-warnings-over-ukraine-but-vow-diplomacy-a75966

[6]https://mfa.gov.ua/en/about-ukraine/cooperation-international-organizations/nato

[7]https://www.dw.com/en/russia-has-been-warned-so-will-nato-defend-ukraine/a-59983502

Pic Courtsey-Rostislav Artov at unsplash.com

(The views expressed are those of the author and do not represent views of CESCUBE.)