• empireOfLove
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Honestly, I have to side with what Biden said on this issue a couple days ago. Ukraine can’t join until the war is concluded, regardless of the outcome., Allowing them to join NATO right now would obligate all member states to escalate the conflict with Russia because all of NATO must defend all member states. That would be a dangerous precedent, as it would essentially be an implicit declaration of war by NATO against Russia and prove Putin’s propaganda blustering true, giving him even more diplomatic ammunition to attack the legitimacy of NATO, and accuse NATO of being an offense organization rather than an defense organization.

    • Countess425@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t think anyone was expecting a vote to ratify Ukraine today, just a solid plan with a timeline. Everyone agrees Ukraine should join when the war ends, what is “the end” of the war; when Russia leaves, or after Russia stops launching attacks from its borders? What steps will Ukraine need to take at that point that it hasn’t already? How long will the process take? Is it more like Finland, more like Sweden, or more like…2014? I think those were the details Zelenskyy was looking for, and while Stoltenberg says one thing, Biden and Scholz say another, Sunak’s talking out of both corners of his mouth, the Baltics want Ukraine on their flank ASAP, Western Europe doesn’t want to provoke Putin still (I think China is running a lot of interference on their behalf diplomatically).

      Ukraine is okay not receiving an invitation to join today, but they at least want a Save the Date and NATO can’t agree on a wedding date yet.

      • TornadoRex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because, using your analogy, the “court case” from the divorce of the previous marriage hasn’t been concluded yet.

        There’s literally no upside to NATO giving a timetable besides “when the war is concluded” because nothing can be done until then anyway.

        What kind of other timetable would you suggest?

      • empireOfLove
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Should they, though? You do realize that results in the entirety of Europe being pitted against Putin’s Russia, who is still a nuclear power run by a despot despite their decaying conventional military. The potential mobilization could begin to snowball very, very rapidly. Russia also still has the BRICS alliance behind them to feed them resources, although the cohesiveness of their pacts has yet to be tested. It could turn into a horrifying bloody mess ten times the scale of Ukraine overnight.

        NATO actively escalating the situation also plays into Putin’s propaganda machine. He has long painted NATO as the aggressor, as NATO being the one who encroached upon Russia’s borders. It’s effective to drum up nationalistic sentiment. Proving him right would galvanize Russia’s population, increase his support, and only further cement his slowly-crumbling political power both domestically and internationally.

        • yunggwailo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Prigz literally marched to moscow with no resistance the combined forces of NATO would take russia in a week lol. Shit we wouldnt even need to get all of NATO involved. Just let Poland go nuts.

          The BRICS alliance is not even a real alliance, its nothing more than a cute outdated acronym.

    • wimpysocks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not even giving ukraine a roadmap or a solid timeline is absolutely disgraceful and just shows where NATO’s priorities lie.