What can NATO offer Ukraine?

Ukrainian membership is a topic that is raising expectations for the NATO Summit in Vilnius. For the first time in many years, so much attention is focused on the Alliance. The security of the European continent and the entire world is at stake. European parliaments are passing resolutions one by one to support Ukraine's accession to NATO, the media are publishing numerous insights from unnamed sources, and world leaders are practicing their ability to make long and expressive statements while having nothing to say. In the swirl of hypotheses, assumptions, and doubts, however, one thing is clear: just weeks before the summit, the Allies have not reached a consensus.

Ukrainian warriors, meanwhile, continue their desperate struggle against the most bloodthirsty tyrant of modern times, keeping Russia from exterminating other democratic countries and peoples at the cost of their own lives. So, what is being offered to Ukraine?

The Israeli-style security model

Several international publications have described the outlines of the so-called "Israeli formula". Representatives of the White House administration and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg alluded to it, noting that "mechanisms for cooperation are still being worked out." The new international agreement does not provide for Ukraine's membership in NATO, but promises a 10-year security partnership similar to the US alliance with Israel. Such cooperation does not impose an obligation on the parties to defend each other, but provides for priority in the supply of weapons, deeper cooperation between intelligence agencies and the military, and the transfer of unique advanced technologies. This was stated by Polish President Andrzej Duda in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.

This model is also expected to provide the basis for building infrastructure that will further facilitate Ukraine's rapid integration into NATO, but will not make the Alliance a party to the conflict with Russia. The latter finds a special response among the Allies, who want to avoid even a hint of escalation at all costs.

"Discussion of the Israeli-style model concept was initiated back in February 2023, during US President Joe Biden's visit to Poland," Duda said, emphasizing that the Israeli-style resonates with the Kyiv Security Compact developed by the Ukrainian side.

The document, signed by the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andrii Yermak and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, does not call for or demand Ukraine's membership in the Alliance, but contains a number of statements about a variety of options for supporting the country "here and now," including:

• […] multi-decade effort of sustained investment in Ukraine’s defence industrial base, scalable weapons transfers and intelligence support from allies, intensive training missions and joint exercises under the European Union and NATO flags.
• security guarantees should be positive and lay out a range of commitments made by a group of guarantors, together with Ukraine.
• […] resources to maintain a significant defensive force capable of withstanding the Russian Federation’s armed forces and paramilitaries.
• massive training and joint manoeuvre programme of Ukrainian forces and partners on Ukrainian territory with international trainers and advisors.
• Advanced defensive systems including providing Ukraine with comprehensive defensive systems to protect key population centres and access points by deploying air and maritime missile defence, cyber capabilities, advanced radar capabilities;
• the presence of "a group of international guarantors to provide financial aid and direct investments; direct funds for reconstruction, including non-repayable financial assistance, to support and develop a new defense industrial base of Ukraine; ensure technology transfers and arms export; coordinate the supply of resources, military equipment, ammunition and services; conduct regular training of the Ukrainian armed forces; and launch a program of cooperation on cyber defense, security and countering cyber threats.

The Biden administration believes that the Israeli security model can meet these demands and solve Ukraine's voiced defense problems, as long as it does not become a NATO member.

Such an agreement would deprive Putin of the hope that a prolonged war would weaken Western partners' political support for Ukraine. "Russia needs to understand that Ukraine has these security guarantees, that they will not disappear over time or because of Western fatigue," Duda said.

Ukraine will have weapons, but no military allies, skeptics of the "Israeli model" emphasize. Israel faces threats that are much smaller in scale. Tel Aviv has signed peace agreements with most of its former enemies. Moreover, its adversaries do not have nuclear weapons, unlike Israel itself.

Bucharest+ 

Franklin Kramer is one of the authors of the infamous NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP), a program of requirements and commitments designed for post-Soviet Eastern European countries seeking to join NATO. Today, Kramer, an Atlantic Council fellow, continues to advocate for a "membership plan" instead of actual cooperation.                                                            

"It should be a path for both the short and long term support for Ukraine. And according to European leaders, it should not promote what I would call a rules-based international order that violates our transatlantic values," he says.

Kramer calls this plan "Bucharest+" after the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest, where member states promised Ukraine that it would one day join NATO, but did not set a date for its accession or the conditions it would have to meet.

It is worth emphasizing that today there is a growing consensus that in 2008, Western countries made a mistake that, over the course of 15 years, turned into the bloodiest war in the modern history of the European continent. Attempts to avoid escalation and appease Putin failed. Is it worth thinking about the consequences of the West's current extremely cautious actions?

Actual Membership 

"Only an alliance itself can provide a real security guarantee, and any temporary arrangements cannot be sold as a substitute for full membership, which provides a collective guarantee of countries to each other, and which I would say is the strongest guarantee available in Europe," Politico quoted a European official.

Opening the way to membership for Ukraine is far from starting World War III. It is worth recalling that Germany became a NATO member despite being under occupation and against the will of the Kremlin. And the wave of NATO enlargement for the so-called New Europe was not based on fears or exalted demands. Back then, NATO was expanding for the sake of value unity.

And finally, perhaps countries that are so proud of their ability to weigh risks should think about who, besides Ukraine, will protect the citizens of the European continent if the United States is engaged in a conflict over Taiwan?