On June 12, the leaders of Germany, France and Poland will discuss in Paris the security guarantees that NATO countries can provide to Ukraine.
.in_text_content_22 { width: 300px; height: 600px; } @media(min-width: 600px) { .in_text_content_22 { width: 580px; height: 400px; } }
Politico writes about this with reference to French diplomats.
Olaf Scholz, Emmanuel Macron and Andrzej Duda will meet a month before the Alliance’s July summit in Vilnius. Ukraine expects from its Western partners a specific plan of action leading to its entry into NATO.
We also intend to discuss issues of defense and European sovereignty.
Last week, the French president said that Ukraine should be offered “a path to NATO membership.” However, German Chancellor Scholz was more careful in his comments. He believes that the focus should not be on membership, but on how to support Ukraine in the war against Russia.
The publication notes: NATO members agree that Ukraine will not be able to join the Alliance while there is a war with the Russian Federation. But about how exactly to respond to her desire to do this, opinions were divided.
Poland has traditionally demanded strong security guarantees for Ukraine.
Politico quotes a French diplomat as saying NATO should send a powerful message to Russia as the Ukrainian counteroffensive begins.
If we do not find a solution that satisfies everyone, there is a risk that we will not reach … a single statement, and this will obviously be the greatest gift we can give Russia, the diplomat said.
What’s happening
Ukraine asks the West for mandatory NATO security guarantees to ensure long-term survival, but allies are not yet ready to give such
According to five European diplomats interviewed by Politico, despite months of talk on the subject, the Western alliance is still divided on almost every element of how to respond to Ukraine’s request.
Security assurances remain open, diplomats say, even as allies are only five weeks away from meeting in Vilnius for a key NATO summit. Ukraine set the summit as a sort of deadline, insisting that allies make clear commitments to admit Ukraine to NATO and provide security guarantees along the way.
Kyiv’s supporters are grappling with an uncomfortable reality: many don’t really want to give Ukraine a concrete timetable for joining NATO at the moment. But they also don’t want to leave Ukrainians frustrated or vulnerable to yet another invasion in the future.
As a result, a number of Western European leaders are increasingly pushing for security guarantees and offering more optimistic language about membership.
French President Emmanuel Macron, according to the interlocutors, supported “something between Israeli-style security guarantees and full NATO membership.” Under the “Israeli style” we are talking about the targeted military assistance that the allies have provided to Israel over the years.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak added his vague commitment that allies “want to make sure we put in place security arrangements for Ukraine for the long term.”
But current and former officials say there is no consensus on the provision of guarantees, or what they would include and in what format they could be used.
However, officials say when politicians now talk about “guarantees” and “assurances,” they are essentially talking about promises to continue to provide weapons and training, rather than concrete promises to stand up for Ukraine.
More often we hear about assurances than guarantees. It seems to come down to the long-term provision of funds that will allow you to protect yourself,” said a diplomat from Central Europe.
Promises to get more weapons are not exactly what Ukraine wants. Zelenskiy is asking increasingly insistently – in particular during a personal meeting with European leaders in Moldova – for unshakable commitments, which are a stepping stone to NATO membership.
Some officials say the security guarantee debate is distracting from the one guarantee they think really matters: possible NATO membership.
Is any country seriously considering giving Ukraine real bilateral security guarantees? Only guarantees under Art. 5 matter,” said a diplomat from Eastern Europe.
Long-term arms supplies, according to this diplomat, “are not a guarantee of security.”
Source: Racurs
I am David Wyatt, a professional writer and journalist for Buna Times. I specialize in the world section of news coverage, where I bring to light stories and issues that affect us globally. As a graduate of Journalism, I have always had the passion to spread knowledge through writing.