The Ukrainian counter-offensive that is showing signs of getting under way will be crucial in shaping the outcome of its conflict with Russia. Even now, though, officials in Kyiv and allied capitals are turning their attention to Ukraine’s long-term place in the institutions that underpin Europe’s peace and prosperity. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is pushing for Kyiv to be given a road map for accession to Nato and security guarantees at an alliance summit in Vilnius next month. In a positive shift, France’s president Emmanuel Macron signalled broad backing last week. His example ought to persuade others — including the US — to follow suit.
Nato declared at its 2008 Bucharest summit that Ukraine, and Georgia, would become members, but Kyiv’s membership bid failed to advance for years afterwards. The resulting ambiguity both created a pretext for Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine last year — claiming he was responding to the expansion of a hostile alliance — while convincing him, wrongly, that he would meet little western resistance.
Immediate entry into Nato when Ukraine is still at war with Russia is unrealistic. Ideally, the alliance at Vilnius would grant Kyiv a concrete timetable, or “membership action plan”, leading to accession when the conflict is over. But, at the very least, the summit should demonstrate a conviction and commitment that Ukraine belongs in Nato, and unambiguously place it on a path of preparation for accession. The large Nato-supplied Ukrainian army that is taking shape is an additional argument for eventual membership.
Unlike in 2008 when the US championed steering Ukraine towards Nato, the Biden administration is cautious. Some European diplomats are optimistic that its objections — and any reservations in Berlin — may ease, as they have towards supplying Kyiv with more lethal weaponry. Intensive diplomacy is needed to secure a deal ahead of Vilnius. This would, no doubt, further antagonise the Kremlin. Yet Putin has long insisted Ukraine’s membership was a fait accompli. Nato should be unequivocal that Russia’s own aggression has made this outcome unavoidable.
Members are unlikely to do more than begin to discuss potential security guarantees for Ukraine at Vilnius. But work on these should form part of preparations to embrace Kyiv — and to bridge any gap between the end of the conflict and the moment Ukraine is ready to join the alliance. While they might not involve a pledge from allies to go to war on its behalf were Ukraine to be attacked again, they would involve commitments to provide Kyiv with weapons, technology and support to deter threats. Macron suggested Ukraine needed “something between the security provided to Israel” — which the US commits to provide with a “qualitative military edge” against enemies — and full Nato membership.
Credible guarantees capable of deterring Russia in future could reduce the need for a decisive defeat of Putin, should Kyiv fall short of retaking all territory Russia has seized since 2014, including Crimea. They would provide the confidence and stability needed for the rest of Ukraine to rebuild and recover, and attract vital foreign investment.
Ukrainians have displayed extraordinary fortitude in defence of their homeland. They deserve to know that after hostilities are over they will be fully embraced into the European “family” — and that allies will do what is necessary to deter Moscow from again threatening their borders. The EU has made Kyiv an official candidate for membership, and is working on a four-year financing plan worth tens of billions of euros that would put its support for Ukraine on a more predictable long-term footing. Parallel moves are now needed on the military and security front.