How the NATO Blundered Ukraine Away
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, or NATO, was created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and several western European nations to provide collective security against the then-Soviet Union.
In 1949, there were 12 founding members at present there are 30.
During the presidency of Bill Clinton, the United States led an initiative to enlarge NATO gradually to include some of the former Soviet allies. In the following debate over enlargement, supporters of the initiative argued that NATO membership was the best way to begin the long process of integrating these states into economic institutions such as the EU.
Some feared Russian aggression and suggested that NATO membership would guarantee freedom and security for the newly democratic regimes. Opponents pointed to the enormous cost of modernizing the military forces of new members; they also argued that enlargement, which Russia would regard as a provocation, would hinder democracy in that country and enhance the influence of hard-liners.
Despite these disagreements, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland joined NATO in 1999; Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia were admitted in 2004; and Albania and Croatia acceded to the alliance in 2009.
NATO’s founding articles declare that any European country that is able to meet the alliance’s criteria for membership can join. This includes Ukraine. The U.S. and its allies in Europe have repeatedly committed to that “open-door” policy.
But in the words of Russian President Vladimir Putin, NATO’s eastward march represents decades of broken promises from the West to Moscow.
“You promised us in the 1990s that [NATO] would not move an inch to the East. You cheated us shamelessly,” Putin said at a news conference last December.
The U.S. says a ban on the expansion of NATO was never on the table. But Russia insists it was — and now, Putin is demanding a permanent ban on Ukraine from joining the pact.
Russia’s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 was a major turning point. Afterwards, popular support for joining NATO rose among Ukrainians, who had once been more ambivalent about the alliance.
Ukraine has repeatedly stated its intention to become a NATO member and also applied for a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) in 2008.
However, its plans were scrapped in 2010 after pro-Russian leader Viktor Yanukovych was elected as President. He stated that he preferred to keep the country non-aligned. Yanukovych fled the country in 2014 following civil unrest. His ouster triggered an invasion by Russian forces that led to Putin annexing the Crimean peninsula.
Following that invasion, Ukraine again made joining the alliance a top priority. In 2017, Ukraine adopted legislation reinstating membership in NATO as a strategic foreign and security policy objective. In 2019, a corresponding amendment to Ukraine’s constitution was effected.
In 2008, NATO promised Ukraine it would one day be given the opportunity to join the alliance. However, talks over its membership continued to drag on.
After years of showing Ukraine the promise of how strong the alliance is, in its darkest time of need, it was left alone to stand off the second largest nuclear power on the planet.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, the Americans were uncomfortable with the Idea of having Soviet Missiles placed on the continent. Cuba doesn’t even share a land border with the USA. If a nuclear nation like the USA is not comfortable with a tiny Island of Cuba having ballistic missiles placed next to it, How would you expect Russia to be comfortable with the idea of Ukraine joining NATO, with whom it shares a long common land border?
Any missiles in Ukraine would easily place Moscow in range of medium and short-range ballistic missiles of the NATO and give little time for Russian Air Defense systems to counter the threat. Also, it gives direct access to the Black Sea on which Russia currently has a major influence.
NATO could have pushed Ukraine to choose a neutral path, a buffer between the West and East; but it decided to be greedy and have the NATO extended right up to Russia’s border.
Now, with Ukraine having to face the consequences of its foreign policy Blunder and NATO refusing to intervene with direct military support, Ukrainians have been left to fend for themselves.
Nobody can blame NATO for this war but it did poke a sleeping bear with its move east policy.
Now with the war finally upon Ukraine and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskiy pleading the NATO for help, All that NATO is able to provide is sanctions and aid in the form of Arms and ammunition.
This behaviour begs the question, Would you leave a friend when he most needs your help if he hasn’t officially signed a contract of friendship with you?
Even if he is not your friend, would you stand and watch a weak person get bullied just because you were afraid of getting hit with a few punches?
Listening to Joe Biden’s speech and hearing him call Russian president Putin a Bully multiple times, begs the question. How do you Stop a Bully?
The answer is simple: you stand up to him and stop the bullying before it happens or escalates.
Intelligence agencies were correct in their assessment that Russia was preparing for a large scale attack, Putin’s threats were not just mere provocations. NATO should have been proactive and responded swiftly. They should have clearly listed out a Strong list of sanctions that would have been shoved down Putin’s throat had he proceeded with the Invasion instead of waiting for it to happen. It would then have been Putin’s call to weigh the economic impact of the sanctions versus the gains from the war.
Instead, the west chose to issue just mere warnings and lip service to the military build-up assuming Putin would not dare to go ahead. The sanctions which have now started to trickle in from some NATO nations and allies seems too little, too late.
The plan to invade Ukraine by Russia was well in the motion for years, as Russia has sold of most of its US Dollar-denominated bonds in 2018 and now has one of the least Debt to GDP ratio amongst developed countries at around 18%. Over the last seven years, Moscow has been able to stabilise the financial system and has nearly $635 billion in gold and forex reserves as of early February. The nation slashed its dollar reserves to just 16% of the central bank’s stockpile in 2021, down from more than 40% just four years prior. That’s meant aggressively hacking its holdings of U.S Treasuries, shrinking ownership by almost 98% from a peak in 2010 and removing dollar assets from its sovereign wealth fund. While possible Western sanctions against Russian banks could lead to a surge in market volatility, Russia is likely to be able to withstand restrictions due to its abundant reserves and give it the time needed to execute its plan without worrying about the consequences.
Also, sanctions are meant to act as a Deterrent and not a Punishment. Yet the west was hesitant to go ahead because their own economy is in tatters. Historic high inflation and sinking stock markets will be further hit if the Oil and Gas supply from Russia is disrupted. Sanctions are like a double-edged sword; they don’t just hurt the intended nation, they also hurt the global economy at large.
History shows us announcing sanctions after the event has occurred has little to no deterrent effect. For example, President Obama sanctioned Russia in 2014 after the annexation of Crimea, yet the Russian economy boomed and little did it deter Putin from going ahead with his further expansionist strategy. North Korea has survived for decades with the toughest sanctions on any country to date.
This should teach us that when it comes to dictators and their ambitions, the economic impact of their actions is seldom a deterrent, if not an enabler.
With Putin getting away with his adventure in Ukraine, What signal does this send to China and Taiwan?
Will the West stand up for the Tiny Island Nation of Taiwan if Xi-Jinping decides to Invade? Does the world have the economic leverage to sanction China if it does go ahead and Invade Taiwan? In its quest for cheap energy and Cheap goods, the west has given away a key economic leverage into the hands of two economic superpowers that are run by dictators. The West and all other developed nations should learn their lesson and start decoupling with countries whose value system is against their own.
With the world on the edge, China will be closely assessing the situation and calculating the impact of sanctions if and when it decides to proceed on Taiwan.
This may be Putin’s war, he’s a dictator and a nationalist avenger for Russia, but America and NATO are not just innocent bystanders in this evolution. They have selfishly tried to expand the scope of their power and influence without giving due thought to the consequences of their action.
