Few people knew about an international security conference in Arendal only a few days ago, and the name of the NATO Secretary General’s chief of staff was also unknown. However, after Norwegian media published Jenssen’s statement about the possibility of Ukraine joining NATO in exchange for relinquishing some Russian-occupied territories, the Director of the Private Office of the NATO Secretary General became a political star, and the conference in Arendal became the center of the world’s media.
The White House, the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Russian Security Council responded to Stian Jenssen’s remarks. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who also attended the Arendal conference, restated the Alliance’s stance on Ukraine and commitment to supporting the Ukrainians in resisting Russian aggression. Jenssen’s suggestion of trading territories for NATO membership did not sit well with Kyiv, as such exchanges are not permissible under international law. And it is the worst thing imaginable to happen.
Meanwhile, it is not as tragic as it seems regarding Jenssen’s statement. We may be dealing with poorly formulated views from an inexperienced politician. Perhaps he saw the Arendal Conference as an unimportant event. The modern world’s transparency makes it difficult for politicians to find discreet places to speak freely. Moreover, the ability to read a regional newspaper from a distant city in seconds is a cruel joke on politicians and diplomats having a hard time getting used to the lack of such unnoticeable places.
Allies of winners
Jenssen tried to explain to the Norwegian public that NATO’s attitude towards Ukraine should not change. Ukraine should become a NATO member regardless of battlefield success and territorial liberation. Jenssen’s boss, Jens Stoltenberg, emphasized that NATO should stand with Ukraine through thick and thin in all circumstances. It contrasts his previous statement that Ukraine’s victory is crucial for its Euro-Atlantic integration.
The change in attitude of at least part of the Western establishment is an important signal. Everyone wants to befriend winners, and those who can’t succeed have few friends. It’s clear how the situation will develop if Ukraine wins on the battlefield: Russia will be forced to admit defeat, Putin’s regime will be in agony, and so on. However, even if Ukraine wins, it won’t have to become a NATO member, but then NATO will join Ukraine.
NATO in each series of developments
Describing the consequences of a less optimistic scenario is challenging. For instance, what would happen if the war continued, territories remained occupied, and Putin maintained power with the support of the Russian nation?
It’s easy to say Ukraine will join NATO if it defeats Russia. But it’s harder to find those who believe Ukraine should join NATO, even if it fails. Politicians who hold this belief are true friends of Ukraine. Friends are not just present during happy moments but also during tough times. A friend in need is a friend indeed. Many Ukrainians have experienced this firsthand in recent months.
It is self-evident that territorial integrity cannot be sacrificed for security guarantees. However, it is crucial that Ukraine does not become a “gray zone” between the West and Russia, a testing ground for Russian military technology, or a land of destruction and despair, even if military operations fail to restore territorial integrity.
Ukraine must join NATO in every possible development series of its attempts to restore justice. The conference in a Norwegian town emphasized truth, setting it apart from recent international Summits of recent months.
Vitaly Portnikov for vot-tak.tv/belsat.eu
Translated by PEV
The opinions and thoughts expressed in the text reflect only the author's views.
