Could NATO-membership be an alternative for Ukraine?

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has always been interested in the possibility of Ukraine  joining the Alliance one day, yet due to Russia’s strong opposition and Ukraine’s inconsistency in their policy, it has not been possible to achieve this goal. In 2008, Ukraine was almost granted a permission to apply for the membership, but Russian President Vladimir Putin’s claim that nuclear warheads would be pointed at Kiev and public opposition drained away Western ambitions. However, since Ukraine’s territory and sovereignty have been infringed already, maybe it was time to reconsider this decision.

Public perception has changed

Historically, the Alliance has been viewed negatively in Ukraine ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Especially among Russian minorities, Russia was seen as a much more reliable ally than the NATO. In the political sphere, a NATO membership has been an ongoing debate, but after the Orange Revolution, it stood as one of the main goals during President Yuschenko’s tenure as Ukrainian Head of State. Yet, occasional conflicts with Russia over gas prices put the negotiations to a halt. Just five years ago, Pew Research Centre conducted a research, which showed that half of the Ukrainian population was not in favour of joining the NATO, while only 28% would have supported such a decision. However, in response to the ongoing events in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, the public opinion changed sides dramatically. In fact, according to the Ukrainian Sociological Organization Rating, currently 44% of Ukrainians would agree to a NATO membership, while only 35% would oppose it. The opinion has changed mostly among the inhabitants of West Ukraine, who are considered to be more pro-European. It is important to note, that Baltic States have also been strongly in favour of Ukraine joining the NATO. Their problematic past with Russia creates an empathy for Ukraine, thus encouraging it to join the NATO's security block as well.

Breaking from the stalemate

Following the general elections, which were recognized by Russia, self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics have established the position of a so-called chief executive, thus continuing their secession from Ukraine. The crisis in Eastern Ukraine echos more and more the Russo-Georgian War of 2008 and Russian-supported states of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The Ukrainian military has been conducting a counterterrorist operation since March, yet it has not been able to make stable breakthrough in the region and has been moved back by the separatists. It is almost self-evident that separatist forces have been trained and armed by Russia; nevertheless, Ukrainian military lacks efficiency due to its obsolete military technique and lack of experience and motivation among the soldiers. A part of the army consists of young people drafted after the mobilization, plus, the stalemate has been discouraging the troops as well.
The NATO has already collaboratively agreed to give advice for the defence reforms and to donate €15 million of financial aid for modernizing the Ukrainian military; however, their hands are tied in terms of bringing military support itself. If the NATO sends its troops to Ukraine now, Russia would interpret it as an intervention to Ukraine’s internal crisis and it would be "obliged" to invade Eastern Ukraine under the pretext to secure Russian-speaking minorities. Thus, Ukraine should be applying for a NATO membership, as long as Russia officially does not declare its involvement in Donetsk and Lugansk. Ukraine’s territorial integrity has been already infringed during the annexation of Crimea, hence, it can ask for the admission to the NATO based on their insecurities of further incursion from Russia.

A Significant Step for Ukraine is Equally Important for the Alliance

Ukraine has a right to assure that its sovereignty will not be disrespected by foreign powers and that its security will be preserved. The NATO has already taken steps to provide more defence and security to the Baltic States, who are fearing possible Russian provocations among their minorities. Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia have been constantly asking for more commitment from the NATO to Eastern Europe and Ukraine specifically. Putin has been using the NATO’s inaction to his advantage and for spreading his influence in the post-Soviet region. Putin’s public policy is built on the illusion that he is successfully opposing the West and as long as the Alliance remains reluctant to reactact to Russian progression, Putin will be inclinined to take further steps. The NATO and the West need to stand up to counter the Russian aggression. The NATO would need to show its determination to ensure safety and stability in Eastern Europe, tighten economic sanctions against Russia, and show that it is absolutely wrong to disregard territorial sovereignty and international laws by actions rather than words; only then will Putin stop, or will public pressure make him stop. Ukraine might be a diverse country, but it has chosen a path towards European integration and it must enjoy its freedom and security.