Will Ukraine Join NATO?
Henry Kissinger, the legendary US diplomat and foreign policy mind, turned 100 this month. Interviewed by the Wall Street Journal for his birthday, Kissinger had a lot to say on Ukraine — and why he’s double-backed on his previous stance.
Known for his realpolitik outlook on world affairs, Kissinger was the man behind a great deal of foreign policy formulations and decision making during the Cold War. And Ukraine, then a part of the USSR, was just as frequent a topic of conversation as it is today.
Except for Kissinger, back then he was essentially a lone wolf; one of few advocates for keeping Ukraine out of NATO — and by extension, within the grasp of Russia. For his 100th birthday, when he gave a personal outlook on world affairs, he spoke about Ukraine.
Specifically, Kissinger stated that the 2008 “offer to put Ukraine in NATO was a grave mistake and led to this war,” this war being the current Russian-Ukraine War. And like many times in Kissinger’s life, his statement is hard to refute.
The 2014 Ukraine Crisis was a result of internal corruption, foreign meddling, a phony government — but more so, it was a result of Putin’s willingness to place his famous “Little Green Men” into Eastern Ukraine and Crimea overnight. It was there, after all, that the conflict in Ukraine truly began; it was a true proxy conflict, and one that only evolved into the war we now witness today.
And somewhere in that statement, Kissinger speaks to Putin’s “cause” or reasoning without actually saying it: The Russian perception has always been of a victim; of a nation surrounded and threatened at its periphery. NATO just so happens to be Russia’s greatest threat, and at its most geographically relevant periphery. And as for Ukraine, it is smack dab in the middle.
But Kissinger’s outlook doesn’t end there. Despite the fact that Western expansion via NATO is a valid alibi for Putin, Kissinger has doubled back on his previous belief of keeping Ukraine out of NATO. He stated that despite the previous foreign policy mistakes with Ukraine, that the US and our allies “were absolutely right to resist” Russia’s military operation against Kyiv.
“I’m in the ironical position that I was alone when I opposed membership, and I’m nearly alone when I advocate NATO membership,” he said, speaking of contemporary notions of Ukraine possibly joining the alliance.
There is a caveat to Kissinger’s statement here though, and one that I find very much in line with his political realism (realpolitik). For Ukraine to eventually become a NATO member, the war would have to end on equally sufficient terms for both Russia and Ukraine. Why? Because a peace treaty established under loose and unexplicit agreements will only put Ukraine back to where they were in 2014, with a proxy war devastating the eastern portions of the county. In some sense, that is where they already are today. Kissinger’s caveat is that a Ukraine in NATO would maybe have to cede Crimea to Russia.
So, is this even possible, let alone likely, at the conflict’s current state? I don’t think so. Not without bringing great risk to NATO. Ukraine is ruthlessly defending itself under the desire to establish a unified nation, while Russia is slowly embracing the fact that it has to resort to the long game to achieve its expansionism. Simply put, neither side seem to be interested in achieving half-goals, they both want the full result of their ambitions.
What do you think?
— — — — —
Happy Birthday Mr. Kissinger
