Why not agree Ukraine will not join NATO?

[OrphanSlug]

NATO is basically an alliance against Russia. Given the close ties between Russia and Ukraine, it seems pretty reasonable that Russia doesn't want Ukraine to join an anti-Russia alliance. And why would NATO members want to agree to go to war with Russia if Ukraine is invaded which is what NATO membership would mean?

Ukraine never joining NATO is a reasonable demand. Why not agree? The "principle" argument is BS. Did we respect the sovereignty of Cuba when they wanted Soviet missiles in their country? And we've let Israel occupy territory for decades citing the same "security concerns."

Finally, no way all 30 nations in NATO would ever agree to let Ukraine join. So what's the big deal here?

Because it is not our place to make an agreement with Russia for Ukraine.

And I do think you underestimate the will of enough NATO nations to have a new member nation right on Russia's border.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Agreeing to never permit Ukraine to join NATO to appease Putin is complete bull shit.

Putin, nor any other country’s leader, has any right to make such a demand, ever.

The United States’ immediate, direct “no” to Putin’s outrageous demand was the only correct response.

NATO is basically an alliance against Russia.

More bull shit.

Read the organization’s charter; https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm
That Putin is most afraid of Article 5 is good. Like Will Smith said in MIB, “Don’t start nothing, won’t be nothing”.

Finally, no way all 30 nations in NATO would ever agree to let Ukraine join.

Idiotic assumption. Do you know what the world will be like in 50 years? 100 years? Of course not.

So what's the big deal here?

Most of us aren’t good with bending over for a former KGB officer with an overinflated sense of personal importance and power on the world stage.

It’s well worth noting that while Russia does have a large, well equipped military, including nuclear weapons, Russia’s GDP is roughly 10% of ours (3 individual American states have higher annual GDP’s than Russia as a whole), and although their chief export, petroleum products, which currently makes up a third of the world’s supply, can be used against us and our Allie’s, severely sanctioning their export, among other sanctions, will hurt Russians/Putin far, far more than America and our Allies.

As of June, 2020, Ukraine became an “Enhanced Opportunities Partner” of NATO. A first step to eventually becoming a full fledged member of the organization.

NATO recognises Ukraine as Enhanced Opportunities Partner

On Friday (12 June 2020), the North Atlantic Council recognised Ukraine as an Enhanced Opportunities Partner. This status is part of NATO’s Partnership Interoperability Initiative, which aims to maintain and deepen cooperation between Allies and partners that have made significant contributions...

www.nato.int

Additionally, Ukraine included the objective of joining the EU and NATO in their constitution.

Ukraine President Signs Constitutional Amendment On NATO, EU Membership

www.rferl.org

If Ukraine makes the necessary changes to facilitate their admission as a NATO member, that’ll be up to NATO, not (****) Putin.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Where's Ukraine's decision in all this? Isn't it up to Ukraine, a independent country to seek to align itself with an alliance of it's choice, or are we just throwing away Urainian sovereignity to the Russians here?

Ukraine has that right but we also have the right not to allow them to join if it's not in our best interest. How is allowing Ukraine to join in our self-interest? How does it make NATO nations safer? It seems we're losing sight of the actual purpose of NATO.

Agreeing not to do something we weren't going to do anyway is an insignificant concession.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Because it is not our place to make an agreement with Russia for Ukraine.

And I do think you underestimate the will of enough NATO nations to have a new member nation right on Russia's border.

Why would NATO member nations want a member nation right on the border of Russia where hostilities already exist? Again, you're agreeing to go to war if Ukraine is invaded.

Moreover, Ukraine has already been invaded. Crimea has already been annexed. The appeasement has already been done. Stating that Ukraine won't be allowed to join NATO is totally meaningless because that's the reality.

Regarding your question, we have every right to decide not to let Ukraine into NATO because it's not in our best interest. It's not up to Ukraine. Ukraine has almost nothing to offer militarily. These sorts of agreements are how WWI started.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

If Ukraine was part of NATO when the Russians invaded Crimea, we would have been bound by treaty to go to war with Russia. Why would we want that?

You already answered your own question.

How would we feel if Mexico entered into a pack with China that said if Mexico is invaded by the U.S. China would be bound to defend it?

1. “Pact”, not “pack”.
2. A mutual defense pact between a democratic and communist country is very highly unlikely (an idiotic notion, really).

Our level of hypocrisy here is insane.

Your level of ignorance is embarrassing.

Yes, Ukraine has a right to its sovereignty but why do we want to enter into some stupid agreement to defend Ukraine? I thought Americans were done with being world police and fighting to defend other countries?

Huge difference between being “the world’s police” and defending an allied country.

Of course, you don’t understand that.

 

[joluoto]

Ukraine has that right but we also have the right not to allow them to join if it's not in our best interest. How is allowing Ukraine to join in our self-interest? How does it make NATO nations safer? It seems we're losing sight of the actual purpose of NATO.

Agreeing not to do something we weren't going to do anyway is an insignificant concession.

It's basically telling Putin Ukraine doesn't matter to the West, which means he'll be Lviv by Sunday.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

My history of opposition to Putin is clear. I'm also against unnecessary war. Do you really want to see human beings die over a completely meaningless pledge?

Gawd, the stupidity.

The pledge is only meaningless if it isn’t honored.

We're basically being asked to agree not to do something that we have no intention of doing.

Continues to be absolutely, 100%, wrong.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

My history of opposition to Putin is clear. I'm also against unnecessary war. Do you really want to see human beings die over a completely meaningless pledge?

We're basically being asked to agree not to do something that we have no intention of doing.

Also, the argument about unnecessary war and asking me if I want innocent people to die is not only insulting crap but the same exact playing to emotions crap that Trump supporters are peddling.

So what gives?

 

[joluoto]

Russia is not going to allow the existence of a Pro- Western Democratic Ukraine. Ukraine actually joining NATO won't happen as long as the conflict with Russia is going on, but telling Russia Ukraine will never be a NATO member is the same as telling Russia they can do whatever they want with Ukraine. While Russia is worried about NATO, the mere existence of a Ukraine that wants to orient westwards is a red line. Putin is not going to stop harass and quite likely invade Ukraine with a promise from the West, would just encourage him even more.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

You already answered your own question.

1. “Pact”, not “pack”.
2. A mutual defense pact between a democratic and communist country is very highly unlikely (an idiotic notion, really).

Your level of ignorance is embarrassing.

Huge difference between being “the world’s police” and defending an allied country.

Of course, you don’t understand that.

Your level of ignorance is embarrassing.

Your level of immaturity is embarrassing. I have not insulted you yet here you are insulting me for no rational reason other than a disagreement about a geopolitical topic. Try not to take things personally and behave in a more mature manner. I'll take the high road and forgive your ad hominem attack.

Huge difference between being “the world’s police” and defending an allied country

Not when you willingly enter into an alliance that does not benefit you and where a conflict already exists. You can make the same alliance argument against every American military action from Vietnam to the Gulf War.

A mutual defense pact between a democratic and communist country is very highly unlikely (an idiotic notion, really)

It seems you've totally missed the point. The likelihood of such an alliance is irrelevant to the argument. A neighboring country entering into an alliance against you is a security threat.

The bottom line is: Would the United States go to war against Russia to defend Ukraine? The answer is no. The American people have no interest in such a war. So, why would we want Ukraine in NATO when we would be required to go to war to defend Ukraine?

Again, a meaningless concession

 

[OrphanSlug]

Why would NATO member nations want a member nation right on the border of Russia where hostilities already exist? Again, you're agreeing to go to war if Ukraine is invaded.

Moreover, Ukraine has already been invaded. Crimea has already been annexed. The appeasement has already been done. Stating that Ukraine won't be allowed to join NATO is totally meaningless because that's the reality.

Regarding your question, we have every right to decide not to let Ukraine into NATO because it's not in our best interest. It's not up to Ukraine. Ukraine has almost nothing to offer militarily. These sorts of agreements are how WWI started.

Then you tell us why Putin is doing all this, because it seems your assertions do not match what Putin is willing to risk here.

What do you think this is all about?

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Russia is not going to allow the existence of a Pro- Western Democratic Ukraine. Ukraine actually joining NATO won't happen as long as the conflict with Russia is going on, but telling Russia Ukraine will never be a NATO member is the same as telling Russia they can do whatever they want with Ukraine. While Russia is worried about NATO, the mere existence of a Ukraine that wants to orient westwards is a red line. Putin is not going to stop harass and quite likely invade Ukraine with a promise from the West, would just encourage him even more.

Again, Russia has already invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea. Putin is using NATO expansion as a pretext for war. By making a meaningless agreement we take that away from him.

 

[joluoto]

Again, Russia has already invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea. Putin is using NATO expansion as a pretext for war. By making a meaningless agreement we take that away from him.

A Democratic Ukraine is unacceptable to Putin's Russia. Doesn't matter if it has any real chance of becoming a NATO member (Putin knows it doesn't have any real chance because of 2014, but that doesn't stop him).

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Then you tell us why Putin is doing all this, because it seems your assertions do not match what Putin is willing to risk here.

What do you think this is all about?

I cannot read Putin's mind. But it's clear he's threatened by the possibility of Ukraine allying itself with NATO and western nations.

My only point is that agreeing to not allow Ukraine into NATO is an inconsequential concession. That's my only point here. It costs us nothing to make such a concession.

 

[Monica33]

There is no big deal , OP.
As long as the US wants to deflect from its busted Covid narrative and as long as Neocons pursue their twisted dreams , this BS might continue .
But so far Putin is running rings round Mr Dementia .Putin will do what he chooses and when and there is nothing the Dementia team can do about it.
Sanctions are risible as the EU will beg for gas

 

[PeteEU]

Because the US/UK alliance needs to save face after years of promoting one of the most corrupt governments in Europe. Basically the US/UK alliance has slept with the devil and cant get out of bed with him

 

[Craig234]

Not when you willingly enter into an alliance that does not benefit you and where a conflict already exists. You can make the same alliance argument against every American military action from Vietnam to the Gulf War.

So, if the Holocaust were going on right now, would you say, don't get involved, don't willingly enter into an alliance that doesn't benefit us and where a conflict already exists? Not only do I think the US has an interest in supporting democracies and the international prohibition against invasions, but we have a special obligation with Ukraine's history of giving up its nukes in exchange for protections.

 

[SoCal]

Ukraine has that right but we also have the right not to allow them to join if it's not in our best interest. How is allowing Ukraine to join in our self-interest? How does it make NATO nations safer? It seems we're losing sight of the actual purpose of NATO.

Agreeing not to do something we weren't going to do anyway is an insignificant concession.

Do we dictatorial control over NATO? Wouldn't the majority of NATO's 30 members be deciding if Ukraine joins?

 

[phoenix2020]

My only point is that agreeing to not allow Ukraine into NATO is an inconsequential concession. That's my only point here. It costs us nothing to make such a concession.

Zoomed into Europe, I agree it’s inconsequential. Zoomed out to the global stage, and signaling over Taiwan’s fate becomes a bigger issue. And I assure you, numerous American industrial sectors collapse with a loss of access to Taiwan. If I’m Taiwanese, I’m paying close attention to the degree we will “accommodate” Putin, looking for signs as to how we may later do the same with the CCP.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Do we dictatorial control over NATO? Wouldn't the majority of NATO's 30 members be deciding if Ukraine joins?

A new member must be unanimously approved. If the U.S. says no, it's no. I doubt there is any chance that Ukraine would be unanimously approved anyway. France and Germany have previously opposed the idea. Plenty of other nations are quietly opposed.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Zoomed into Europe, I agree it’s inconsequential. Zoomed out to the global stage, and signaling over Taiwan’s fate becomes a bigger issue. And I assure you, numerous American industrial sectors collapse with a loss of access to Taiwan. If I’m Taiwanese, I’m paying close attention to the degree we will “accommodate” Putin, looking for signs as to how we may later do the same with the CCP.

I think Taiwan knows the answer. The U.S. will not fight a war with China over Taiwan. The U.S. and it's allies will levy heavy sanctions against China that make such an invasion economically disastrous.

Moreover, China and Russia have the same problem. Their citizens are not interested in war and sanctions threaten to destabilize their governments. Russia and China face no risk of military opposition.

Again, my point is conceding that Ukraine will never join NATO is a cheap concession.

 

[phoenix2020]

I think Taiwan knows the answer. The U.S. will not fight a war with China over Taiwan. The U.S. and it's allies will levy heavy sanctions against China that make such an invasion economically disastrous.

Moreover, China and Russia have the same problem. Their citizens are not interested in war and sanctions threaten to destabilize their governments. Russia and China face no risk of military opposition.

Again, my point is conceding that Ukraine will never join NATO is a cheap concession.

Not if holding off on the concession delays China’s eventual takeover of Taiwan by even as little as a year. After all, Putin was going to invade Ukraine anyway, concession or not, so why give him the concession when it would not make any difference whatsoever?

 

[Luckyone]

NATO is basically an alliance against Russia. Given the close ties between Russia and Ukraine, it seems pretty reasonable that Russia doesn't want Ukraine to join an anti-Russia alliance. And why would NATO members want to agree to go to war with Russia if Ukraine is invaded which is what NATO membership would mean?

Ukraine never joining NATO is a reasonable demand. Why not agree? The "principle" argument is BS. Did we respect the sovereignty of Cuba when they wanted Soviet missiles in their country? And we've let Israel occupy territory for decades citing the same "security concerns."

Finally, no way all 30 nations in NATO would ever agree to let Ukraine join. So what's the big deal here?

Your post reminds of these adages

"the end justifies the means"
"honor, justice and freedom are not important. Getting what you want is important"

 

[Slartibartfast]

NATO is basically an alliance against Russia.

This is the initial error that made the rest of your post wrong.

 

[The AntiDonald]

NATO is basically an alliance against Russia. Given the close ties between Russia and Ukraine, it seems pretty reasonable that Russia doesn't want Ukraine to join an anti-Russia alliance. And why would NATO members want to agree to go to war with Russia if Ukraine is invaded which is what NATO membership would mean?

Ukraine never joining NATO is a reasonable demand. Why not agree? The "principle" argument is BS. Did we respect the sovereignty of Cuba when they wanted Soviet missiles in their country? And we've let Israel occupy territory for decades citing the same "security concerns."

Finally, no way all 30 nations in NATO would ever agree to let Ukraine join. So what's the big deal here?

It has been widely agreed to by many NATO nations that Ukraine will not join NATO. At least not within the next 10 years. The German chancellor just said it again yesterday and Putin invaded anyway.

NATO has never been Putin's biggest grievance. It's a ruse. Putin want's power, period. He's an out-of-control dictator.