Could NATO have duped Ukraine to fight Russia?
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine could as well be one of the angriest people in the world today. On July 11, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) failed to set a timetable for his country’s admission in the alliance, even after he has paid for the Russia-Ukraine war through his citizens’ blood and tears.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said allies had agreed on a package of three elements to “bring Ukraine closer to NATO,” giving the impression that all along the security alliance could have duped Zelenskyy to make him fight the proxy war aimed at weakening and containing the adversary’s military and ideological strength.
Zelenskyy’s reaction from the foregoing was fast and furious. In a tweet he condemned the vague wording of NATO’s statement, terming the lack of a timeline and commitment as “unprecedented and absurd”. He realised that he had been played, saying it appeared that “there is no readiness to invite Ukraine to NATO or to make it a member of the Alliance,”
According to a report uploaded on the United Kingdom’s House of Commons library in May titled, “Military assistance to Ukraine since the Russian invasion”, the US and the UK have been the largest providers of military assistance to Ukraine since the war started in February, 2022. The US has provided $37.3 billion while the UK has provided £2.3 billion in 2022, and a commitment to match that funding in 2023. Well, the writing is on the wall for Ukraine. The unfolding scenario could also be thinly veiled blackmail by the US after Ukraine said that while it welcomed the decision by the United States to supply it with the internationally banned cluster munitions, it would not use them in Russia. A 2008 treaty, the Oslo Convention on Cluster Munitions, bans the use of cluster bombs. It is also instructive that top US ally, the United Kingdom, ruled out supplying cluster munitions to Ukraine.
From the foregoing, it is clear that a consensus to admit Ukraine is far from near. According to the NATO Constitution, any “decision to invite a country to join the Alliance is taken by the North Atlantic Council, NATO’s principal political decision-making body, on the basis of consensus among all Allies.”
The Vilnius summit was full of promises, but very short on commitment and timelines. Going by his reaction, this is definitely not what Zelenskyy had bargained for. He must have gone back home dejected after harbouring high hopes about his indispensability in the NATO scheme of things.
Comments by French president Emmanuel Macron during the summit that NATO members were finding it hard to keep up the supply of arms to Ukraine shows potential fatigue for the support. There is really little to show for the billions-worth military assistance to Ukraine in its war with Russia. Zelenskyy’s bravado has been hot air, as Russia’s military offensive remains relatively stable against NATO’s proxy. Snide remarks by United Kingdom’s Defense Secretary Ben Wallace that Ukraine’s allies wanted to “see gratitude” and that his country was “not Amazon” when it came to the delivery of weapons also sent the wrong signal.
Apparently, the party is over for Zelenskyy. He seems to be losing clout after failing to deliver on his tough talk of pushing back Russian troops from Ukraine’s territory, and even taking the war to Russia’s president Vladimir Putin. The jury of experts is still out there on the options left for Zelenskyy after the NATO snub. The world is full of betrayal of the West’s use-and-dump policy.
Zelenskyy could actually surprise his allies by secretly sending emissaries to Putin for a rapprochement. He will actually have nothing to lose. His country is in shambles, and has been abandoned by those who promised to go the whole hog with him.
—The writer is a PhD student in International Relations
