A neutral and disinterest analysis of the ongoing crisis in Ukraine profoundly suggests that the Western NATO Alliance (now a group of 31 member states) is the root cause of the problem. Therefore, the pragmatic search of the Ukraine crisis must equally focus to counter the dissident approaches: on one side, there is Ukraine, which wants a NATO-membership; on the other side is Russia, which opposes it; and yet there is a European side who wants the security of Ukraine, without annoying Russia and, above all, there is the American side, not ready to compromise its global power interest. Amidst this frame of multiple interest of conflict, finding a durable solution of the problem seems a bumpy road ahead.
The Ukrainian thinking: ‘’Today, our survival is our unity,” said Mr Zelensky on how he thought the war will end. “I believe Ukraine is fighting for its survival.” His country was moving towards Europe economically, as well as through its values, he said. “We chose this path. We want security guarantees. In 2023, 17.6 million people in Ukraine require humanitarian assistance, 45% of whom are women, 23% are children and 15% are people with disabilities. Approximately 40% of Ukraine’s population is now in need of humanitarian assistance and protection. The 2023 Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) for Ukraine calls for $3.9 billion to reach 11.1 million people with food, health-care, cash and other life-saving assistance.
What Russians think: “President Putin has been, is and remains open to any contacts in order to discuss possible solutions to the Ukrainian problem,” Dmitry Peskov the kremlin spokesperson, told reporters at a recent press briefing in St. Petersburg. Ukraine is important for Russia for two reasons. The first is to do with Russia’s imperialism. Ukraine was the largest republic of the Soviet Union after Russia, so when it voted for independence in 1991, the Soviet Union fell apart. Recently, [Vladimir] Putin’s plan to rebuild Russia as a great power and a pole in our multipolar geopolitics has been dependent on whether he would be able to bring Ukraine into his Eurasian Union.
The second reason is the issue of Russians’ national identity. This theme takes a serious note in the Russian quarters that the creation of a modernized Russia owes its debt to the Ukrainians. On the contrary, the thinking prevailing in the Eastern Europe holds that ’’Power is rapidly seeping from the “old Europe”— countries in Eastern Europe are now concerned for their own future beyond the Russian sphere. And yet, it becomes clear that for the North Atlantic Community, the issue of Ukraine conflict has profound consequences for the stability of Europe and the future of American power around the world, particularly how the United States navigates burgeoning strategic competition with Russia and China. Issue of Ukraine’s NATO bid: Arguably, the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO does not seem very realistic, nor did it enhance Ukraine’s security – on the contrary. Though the word neutral has become moribund in Western capitals and Kyiv, the prospect of joining NATO is nonetheless a red-line for Russia.
Yes, every country is free to choose or change its security arrangements, but alliances also have a choice to decide who join(s) them. And states should not strengthen their security at the expense of others – which is how Moscow reads attempts by its neighbours to join NATO. Currently US president Joe Biden attended the NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania. Alliance leaders debated the war and revised plans for dealing with the Ukrainian crises.
The NATO joint communique issued at the Vilnius NATO Conference (July 11) declared, ’’ Russia bears full responsibility for its illegal, unjustifiable and unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine which has gravely undermined Euro-Atlantic and global security and for which it must be held fully accountable. We continue to condemn in the strongest terms Russia’s blatant violations of international law, the Charter of the United Nations and OSCE commitments and principles’’. Yet there is silence on the issue of Ukraine’s NATO bid.
Pragmatically put, for the foreseeable future the optimism about Ukraine’s entry into the NATO club seems eclipsed given the complexity of legal and technical stipulation, albeit a sui-generis, non-aligned security mechanism for Kyiv could be explored. So far as the Minsk agreement is concerned, amidst the several provisions on Ukrainian constitutional reform -cum-autonomy for parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, the issue seems somewhat complicated. Any prospects of the division of Ukraine is far remote.
That said, for a stable settlement, the issue regarding the future status of Crimea would also have to be addressed since Ukraine is not yet ready to withdraw its claim over the Crimean sovereignty. Obviously, none of these choices will be attractive to all sides, though none of these stakeholders’ wants that the war in Ukraine be continued. Moreover, the continuation of the war will certainly be unpalatable for Ukraine, Europe and the world at large. In general, the European Ukraine joined the Council of Europe, but not the European Council, in 1995. Kyiv applied for the EU’s bid in January 2022. The EU is not yet ready to officially talk about the prospects of Ukraine’s accession to the ranks of member states, but Ukraine’s European perspective is recognized. In 2021, Ukraine was preparing to formally apply for EU membership in 2024, in order to join the European Union in the 2030s.
Accepting Ukraine within the NATO club—because there should be no objection to this nation joining those with countries like Sweden and Finland as members of this military alliance—holds no suggieciet security guarantee. In order to respond to their just concerns for security, the principle of neutrality must be extended into the heart of Europe in a kind of arc of neutrality. But neutrality is fragile and must therefore be guaranteed by global international bodies. And most importantly, NATO-Russia pact signed in 1997 during the Bill Clinton’s Administration restricts the NATO membership closer to the Russian borders. So far President Putin’s mindset reflects that Moscow is not yet ready to ignore that stipulation. Nonetheless, the war in Ukraine is against the interest of humanity. Thus, peace diplomacy must continue to halt the war.
—The writer, an independent ‘IR’ researcher-cum-international law analyst based in Pakistan, is member of European Consortium for Political Research Standing Group on IR, Critical Peace & Conflict Studies, also a member of Washington Foreign Law Society and European Society of International Law. He deals with the strategic and nuclear issues.
Email: [email protected]
