We should not entertain Nato membership for Ukraine.

The most important objective should be to remove one of Vladimir Putin’s chief reasons for invading.

Nigel Farage. Feb 15, 2022

As more than 100,000 Russian troops sit tight around Ukraine’s borders, an intensive series of negotiations involving international leaders is taking place. Yet I believe it is time for the Western allies to reconsider what the real purpose of Nato is. Boris Johnson is talking to world leaders to avert crisis. I would urge him to think hard and fast about this. If American intelligence is correct, time may be short. 

To resolve any potential conflict in life, it is important to put yourself in the shoes of your opponent. Russia, with its painful history of being invaded, has always been more fearful of the West than the West is of Russia. Despite being the largest country in the world, it suffers from a form of paranoia that lasted throughout the Cold War and has prevailed ever since.

Today, Russia sees the continued expansion eastwards of both the European Union and Nato as a direct threat. Every Western military and political leader says they have no intention of threatening Russia, which is true. But they all seem to misunderstand Vladimir Putin’s fundamental objection to the West’s approach in Ukraine.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, countries which formerly lived under the Soviet regime have, understandably, tried to forge links with the West. For them, joining the EU and Nato has been regarded as a means of protecting themselves against future Russian encroachments. But the question that must be asked now is whether this strategy of Western-led expansion makes sense any longer. Does it make the world a safer place? It is in Ukraine where these vital questions must be addressed.

The Revolution of Dignity in 2014 brought down Ukraine’s democratically-elected leader, Viktor Yanukovych. He may well have been corrupt, but the pictures in Kiev at the time of crowds waving EU flags spoke volumes in his deeply divided country. The EU had pumped aid money into Ukraine and some EU leaders urged this developing nation to join the bloc. Like it or not, this so-called EU peace project helped to provoke the present crisis because it was guaranteed to anger Putin.

When I made these arguments at the time, I was written off as a Putin lover. How dare I say such a thing, people wondered? To be clear, I do respect Putin as a political operator. He is miles ahead of our leaders. This does not mean that I am not suspicious or worried about his expansionist intentions, however, because I am. My point is that the West must remove any valid excuse Putin thinks he may have to invade Ukraine. That is why I believe the time has come for Nato to redefine its aims and to realise that Ukraine joining the organisation would be a terrible mistake. 

There is no possible benefit to be gained from Ukraine’s membership of Nato other than as a show of strength against the Russian leader. In geopolitical terms, it makes no sense. If the West were to state clearly that Ukraine will not join Nato, it would be making a concession, but it would also remove one of Putin’s chief reasons for invasion. I quite understand that some people may view such a move as a sign of weakness – of appeasement, even – but I believe that if it ended the current deadlock and secured peace, it would be worth it.

If any further proof of the idiocy of the West’s current policy were needed, it is that this dispute has driven Russia straight into the arms of Communist China. It has even been suggested that Putin has held off from invading Ukraine because he does not wish to risk offending President Xi by launching his attack before the end of the Winter Olympics in Beijing, thereby overshadowing them. By some assessments, President Xi has also voiced his support for Russian demands to stop Nato’s expansion. This strongly suggests that the two countries are in cahoots.

Throughout modern history, the British, above all, have understood the concept of buffer states as a means of preventing conflict. This idea hasn’t always worked, but it is a much more sensible policy than the current one. The US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, needs to understand this.

Over the next few days, Boris Johnson will travel around Europe in what has been described as a diplomatic blitz. By speaking to world leaders, he has a chance to prevent an awful conflict. Convincing them that Ukraine’s mooted membership of Nato is paused at this time might be one way of Johnson’s mission being a success. 

Sign-up to our Russia-Ukraine crisis webinar and chat to Telegraph journalists on Wednesday February 16 at midday.