More than 500 days after Russian leader Vladimir Putin embarked on his misadventure in Ukraine, styled as a “special military operation”, Nato has shown Volodymyr Zelensky some long-distance love.
At a Nato summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, earlier this week, Zelensky didn’t seem appreciative. Those who support him in the war appeared to have had the conversation without him — until very late in the day. Frustrated, he tweeted: “It seems there is no readiness neither to invite Ukraine to Nato nor to make it a member of the alliance.”
But that wasn’t it. There was no timeline for Ukraine to join. There was no list of conditions that Zelensky could work on with a view to joining later. There was also no invitation to join at a future unspecified date. It was a difficult week for him. He had a belligerent, murderous neighbour pummelling him and friends in Nato ready to support him — but who didn’t want him too close.
Zelensky’s ungrateful, often impatient if not undiplomatic approach was used against him. First, UK defence secretary Ben Wallace pushed back when asked at a press conference to comment on Zelensky’s tone. “Whether we like it or not,” he said, “people want to see a bit of gratitude.”
Wallace noted Ukraine had a habit of treating allies “as if they were an Amazon warehouse with lists of demands” for weapons without making an effort to win them over, as diplomacy dictates.
Elsewhere, a Ukrainian activist asked US national security adviser Jake Sullivan if President Joe Biden's administration was “afraid of Russia losing, afraid of Ukraine winning” to which he retorted: “The American people do deserve a degree of gratitude.”
If there’s a country in the world that’s deserving of Nato’s assistance and acceptance, it’s Ukraine
Biden, as it turned out, kept Ukraine out of Nato at the summit. He invoked a long-established rule of the 31-nation military bloc that a country at war can’t join. If it did, Nato would be forced partake in that war, because an attack against a Nato country is an attack on all its members.
In a real sense, Biden was saving Nato from a direct war with Russia. Zelensky, meanwhile, carries it all on his shoulders. Nato publicly pledges support and he’s constantly lobbying for more. But what would solve his headache is if the weight was shared with all the 31 countries. By not even entertaining his special circumstances, he couldn’t but be frustrated at being kept at a distance.
If there’s a country in the world that’s deserving of Nato’s assistance and acceptance, it’s Ukraine. After all, since its inception almost 75 years ago, Nato has been a countervailing force against Russian aggression. It is the principal deterrent. This is why when former US president Donald Trump mooted the idea of withdrawing from Nato, which he described as a drain on US resources, the whole of Europe became jittery.
Trump caused many leaders mini-strokes when he staged a low-key walkout while German leader Angela Merkel was speaking at a Nato summit in Brussels. It was undiplomatic, but Trump wanted Nato to know what he thought of it. And, days later, he was at a press conference with Putin in Helsinki, Finland, causing more concern about his threats to withdraw from Nato.
But a US withdrawal from Nato, unimaginable before Trump, is exactly what would excite Russia. Michele A Flournoy, an under secretary of defence under president Barack Obama, described it thus: “It would destroy 70-plus years of painstaking work across multiple administrations ... and it would be the wildest success that Vladimir Putin could dream of.” And his dream is Russian expansion. The one president in the world standing against such an expansion — or encroachment — is Zelensky. Yet, leaders of the countries that want to keep Putin from his wildest dreams won’t even extend an invitation to the leader standing in his way.
If they truly wanted Ukraine to join Nato, they could have done it. There’s no clause that can’t be amended. All the countries in attendance in Lithuania intermittently change their constitutions to do what they feel important. Ukraine is worth supporting — but it’s not that important to change the rules even in a win-win situation.
Why?
There are two main reasons. The obvious one is self-interest. They don’t want direct wars they can avoid. The second is the archaic world governance system we have. The UN is impotent against so-called superpowers. They do as they wish around the globe without consequence. Putin is a warmonger who ought to be punished. But who is going to do it? Biden and all his hangers-on, who are happy that he continues to fund over two-thirds of Nato activities, neither have the gumption nor the ability to subject Putin to a process.
Similarly, American presidents have committed innumerable atrocities across the globe. They enact laws that say American soldiers shall not be subject to the laws of any other jurisdiction. They can, and do, bomb with impunity. In short, they’re no different than Putin. This is why they’re not members of the International Criminal Court — because they, like Putin, would trip over their criminal conduct.
If you add to this toxic mix the big boys’ access to nuclear weapons, it’s even clearer the UN exists to lord it over small countries. South Africa, Zimbabwe, Lithuania, Nicaragua and other such nonentities. When it suits the big boys of Nato, Ukraine will be allowed in. Anything that will make them go into a direct war with Russia will force them to keep Zelensky at a distance, while showing him some modicum of support.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.