There was a particularly specific moment at the inner NATO summit about four years ago, which completely captured the volatile way, the Western Military Alliance is Ukraine.
The Secretary -General of the day, Jeans Stoltenberg, who is often unbearable, was asked about the long -time Eastern Europe’s attempt to join the allies.
At that point, Ukraine was waiting for more than ten years to accept.
The first signs of a storm approached, there was a fateful accumulation of Russian forces on the border in the previous spring.
Stalltenberg was asked if any scenario where Ukraine joins NATO without challenging Russia. (Full disclosure: I am the person who asked the question).
It was – perhaps – unfortunately.
Stotenberg, however, waved it.
Each country answered the right to choose and choose its alliances and associations.
The point – then and now – is that Ukraine chose. She chose aside and drew her own path. Many with allies in 2008 believing, and perhaps misleading, have cast a western promise of integrity and collective security were their future.
However, then – as now – I left Ukraine waiting outside the door.
Ukraine on the margin
At the NATO summit for this week, President Folodimir Zelinski – who suspended every word of leaders during the 2022 and 2023 gatherings – was deported to the side lines and the dining hall while Western leaders discussed the fate of his country behind closed doors.
In fairness, Zelenskky got a time with the main leaders, including US President Donald Trump.
Through this meeting, he obtained the additional Patriot missile batteries systems that were urgently needed.
There was a collective guarantee for additional assistance of 35 billion euros from European allies. Canada – in the Group of Seven in the previous week – An additional 4.3 billion dollars promise.
The summit ended with NATO Secretary -General Mark Root, which is The Trump administration is rarely eliminated these daysSaying that the Ukraine’s road to join NATO, as announced at the Felnis 2023 summit, is still “irreversible.”
Perhaps he did not get a Washington note.
It was clear that the summit was designed for Trump – a short, focused agenda aimed at showing allies to show money on defensive spending. Ukraine was necessary, but it was unpleasant, after thinking.
Canada, the original sponsor of Ukraine’s membership in 2008, was reluctantly going.
“We preferred, Canada preferred a special session with NATO with Ukraine at all,” Prime Minister Mark Carney told reporters at the end of the summit on Wednesday.
While Carney said that he raised several points related to Ukraine during the meeting of the leaders of the closed door, he made it clear that most of the collective agenda that was discussed has nothing to do with Ukraine and everything related to the fears of other allies. The Arctic was used as an explanation of something that Zelinski may not care.
The Prime Minister’s statements shed light on the basic gap between Europe and the United States (at least this repetition under the Trump administration) on Ukraine.
“The United States does not see Ukrainian security necessary for European security and our European allies,” said the former US ambassador to NATO Cort Volker in a modern committee organized by the European Policy Analysis Center.
He said that the Europeans feel that if Putin allows payment in Ukraine – or if Ukraine does not survive as an independent sovereign state – it is in danger. ”
Valerie Mankota, a constructive worker in the capital of Ukraine, told reporters that he was asleep when he felt an explosion and wakes up in the rubble with a giant plate. The explosion was one of overnight, as Russia fired another barrage of strikes on Ukraine.
This was implicit in Roti’s enthusiastic reassurance about the presentation of Ukraine’s membership, although it risks Bang anger.
“They see the need to support Ukraine as an integral part of our security through NATO. The United States simply does not see it in this way,” Volker said.
He said that the United States “believes that NATO is NATO. You are protecting a five -article of NATO members, and the better our European allies themselves.” “And Ukraine, it is unfortunate. It’s a war.”
The red line in Russia
Russian President Vladimir Putin made Ukraine’s possible membership in NATO a major red line for the allies, and he insisted on preventing his neighbor from entering the Western alliance – forever.
Trump, in his endeavor to the Nobel Peace Prize award, bought in the argument and made criticism of Ferbutin Moscow – either in NATO or G7.
Late a month ago, Trump’s envoy to Ukraine, Keith Keel, said that Russia’s concern about the expansion of East NATO was fair.
The former Secretary -General of the NATO Championship says Lord George Robertson, former Secretary of Nayno.
“I have held nine meetings with Vladimir Putin during my presence as a general secretary,” said Robertson, who led NATO from 1999 to 2003, when Putin reached power and the coalition began to expand to the previous eastern Zikal countries.
“At any time, he did not complain of NATO expansion. Not at all.”
In a recent interview with CBC News, Robertson describes the Putin’s argument in NATO as a “reactionary effect” to go to war against his neighbors (Russia also invaded Georgia in 2008).
Mansi in washing history, flooding wrong information, the last coincidence of vanity, and the rush to redeeming and massaging politics points is an agreement signed by Putin and the leaders of the allies-including US President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Jean-Krtian-who established the NATO Rossa Council in 2002.
Robertson said: “Vladimir Putin put his signature on the Rome Declaration, which supported the NATO law (1997) and ensuring the regional integrity of all nations in Europe,” said Robertson. “His signature with me.”
History and event are burned in his memory.
Robertson said: “May 20, 2002, on the same day that he stood beside me at the press conference and said that Ukraine is a sovereign and independent nation, a country that will make its own decisions on peace and security.”
“Now the man himself says that Ukraine is not a nation and in a way, violently, it should be absorbed within his concept of New Russia.”
The former Secretary -General, during his interview, admitted that he often carries a copy of the announcement of more than two decades in his pocket.
The document, for Robertson, is a permanent reminder of Putin’s betrayal-perhaps even a personal taste for the completion of the crown that turned history into dust.
When Ukrainians look at the same piece of paper, they not only see betrayal, but also another volatile moment in time.
https://i.cbc.ca/1.6290369.1750976420!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/16x9_1180/1237265309.jpg?im=Resize%3D620
Source link