Ukrainian and Western officials consider land-for-NATO model to end war - Financial Times
Ukraine and its Western allies are discussing a possible compromise under which Kyiv could gain NATO membership in exchange for a diplomatic solution to the issue of the Russian-occupied territories in the future.
This is reported by the Financial Times, Censor.NET reports with reference to Ukrainska Pravda.
The article states that the new strategy that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented to American leaders last week is to ask its allies to strengthen its position militarily and diplomatically to force Russia to the negotiating table.
Western diplomats and a growing number of Ukrainian officials are inclined to believe that meaningful security guarantees can form the basis of a negotiated settlement in which Russia retains de facto, but not de jure, control over all or part of the Ukrainian territory it currently occupies.
Neither Kyiv nor its supporters propose to recognise Russia's sovereignty over the fifth part of Ukrainian territory that it has illegally seized since 2014. Recognition of this fact would encourage further Russian aggression and seriously undermine the international legal order. Instead, there is a tacit agreement that these lands should be returned diplomatically in the future. However, even this is a sensitive issue for Ukrainians, especially when it is presented as a basis for compromise with Moscow.
What is being discussed more openly is the nature and timing of the security guarantees that Ukraine should receive to support the settlement. In Washington, Zelenskyy reiterated his position on fast-track NATO membership.
The United States is afraid to bring Ukraine under the umbrella of Article 5 of the NATO Treaty until the war is over. However, some of Ukraine's allies suggest that such an option could still be realistic.
Jens Stoltenberg, who stepped down as NATO Secretary General this week, recalled that the security guarantees the United States provides to Japan do not extend to the Kuril Islands, four of which Japan considers its own but which have been controlled by Russia since the Soviet Union seized them in 1945. He also cited the example of Germany, which joined NATO in 1955 despite the fact that the country was divided. Only West Germany was protected by NATO.
The newspaper reports that the West German model for Ukraine has been discussed in foreign policy circles for more than 18 months. Now the idea is gaining momentum in official circles.
Most supporters acknowledge that Moscow would not like the idea, while sceptics fear that it could provoke an escalation. Membership in NATO would guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty and allow it to continue its Western orientation - goals that Russian leader Vladimir Putin is determined to undermine.
In her article for Foreign Affairs, the American historian Mary Sarotte makes a convincing case that NATO membership conditions can be adapted to individual circumstances. For example, Norway pledged not to host NATO bases on its territory when it became a founding member of the Alliance. West Germany's strategy was to make it clear that its borders were temporary. It had to tolerate the division indefinitely, but not accept it and refuse to use force to regain East Germany.
Sarotte argues that Ukraine should define a militarily defensible border, agree not to station troops (probably including partner troops - ed.) or nuclear weapons on its territory on a permanent basis unless there is a threat of attack, and refuse to use force beyond that border except in self-defence.
Membership in NATO on these terms would be presented to Moscow as a fait accompli, Sarotte said.
