A bloody stalemate, or worse, beckons unless the West sees Kyiv must speedily join the alliance
18 November 2023 • 8:30pm
It is widely accepted that truth is the first casualty of war. The conflict in Ukraine is no exception.
One of the most common lies being spouted by Vladimir Putin and his cronies is that Russia is effectively at war with Nato. This makes it more acceptable to explain to the mother or widow of yet another young Russian conscript killed in battle: he is portrayed as a heroic patriot, fighting to protect his homeland from the might of more that 30 Western nations.
The truth, of course, is very different. On February 24 last year, Russia attempted an unprovoked full-scale invasion of Ukraine in the belief that it could overrun its smaller neighbour within days and with no significant Nato response.
Ukraine, much to its regret, is not a Nato member, although it has long been a Nato “partner” since 1994, three years after the Soviet Union broke up. Had it been a full-blown Nato member, Russia is unlikely to have tried to invade Ukraine for fear of massive retribution by the West.
Nato – the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation – was formed in 1949 by 12 countries, including the US, UK, Canada and France. It currently has 31 members across Europe and North America, which have agreed to help one another if one of them is attacked.
Ukraine would become a Nato member tomorrow if that offer was on the table, but to date it is not – member countries fear it would lead to a massive escalation of the conflict in eastern Europe. So Nato countries continue to provide weapons and other aid to Ukraine, but without putting its armed forces on the ground.
In an essay published earlier this month, Ukraine’s commander-in-chief, General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, gave a realistic assessment of the war, which is now in its 21st month. He suggested that the conflict was at somewhat of a stalemate, and was moving towards a stage of “static and attritional fighting”.
So what now? I have visited Europe’s second largest country five times since the war began, spending much of that time in cities and towns close to the frontline. I have sounded out countless Ukrainians, military commanders and civilians alike, for their thoughts.
The dream for Ukrainians is that the West, notably the US, will give them limitless F16 fighter jets and other hi-tech weaponry to enable them to win. But that is little more than a dream as things stand today, and as “war fatigue” and the cost of the conflict grow.
There are two more gloomy scenarios now being talked about privately by Ukrainians in hushed tones. The first is to save yet more lives being lost through a partial capitulation, whereby Ukraine reluctantly cedes part of its Russian-occupied territory, perhaps Crimea and land in the east, as part of a peace deal.
The second scenario, no less appealing to Ukrainians, is a war of attrition possibly lasting up to a decade or more, which would again favour Russia. Before the war, Ukraine’s population was just under 44 million (and it is much smaller now) compared with Russia’s population of almost 150 million. So, in a prolonged war and with its greater manpower, Russia would slowly gain the advantage.
However, there is a third and more appealing scenario that I am advocating today. This is to progress on the political and diplomatic fronts – while also supporting Ukraine militarily and imposing sanctions on Russia – so that the country moves towards Nato membership and greater protection, sooner rather than later.
Significantly, Ukraine moved a step closer to EU membership last week, but it is Nato membership which is, ultimately, far more important. Some progress in this area has already been made but more is needed.
As of July, Nato agreed that Ukraine does not have to complete the Membership Action Plan process, one of the usual two requirements that would-be members usually have to meet. This means Ukraine’s path to membership will now be a “one-step process”: its invitation to join will come when allies agree and conditions on membership are met.
Furthermore, the G7 group of industrial nations (the US, the UK, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan) is committed to what are called “security guarantees” to help Ukraine fight its war in the short-term and to ensure that, after this war ends, Russia never again tries to invade its neighbour. President Zelensky has welcomed these “guarantees” as a way of moving forward, but stresses they must not be looked at as an alternative to Nato membership in the long run.
One shrewd Ukrainian MP told me: “The path that I favour is to acknowledge that we will not be able to achieve victory immediately. That it will be a step-by-step process towards us achieving our goals of both an integral and sovereign Ukraine and a situation whereby Russia never again threatens our borders. Given the current situation, membership of Nato is even more important than the immediate liberation of our territories.”
In reality, the process by which Ukraine obtains Nato membership may be much slower than this MP and others would like. However, in the end, we all, including Western countries, sometimes have to take “the least worst option”.
The one outcome of this war that Nato must never permit is that Russia defeats its neighbour. It should also be remembered that bullies, whether of the playground or the global-leader variety, often back down when they are challenged.
Allowing Ukraine to have full membership of Nato and the risks that go with it are surely better than allowing a power as evil as Putin-led Russia to absorb parts, or even all, of Ukraine. That would be both a betrayal of Kyiv and would undoubtedly send the wrong message to the world at a time when global peace has rarely been more fragile.
Lord Ashcroft KCMG PC is an international businessman, philanthropist, author and pollster
The members of Nato caused this satanic war by refusing to accept Ukraine as a member.
When Poland and the Baltics joined the EU and Nato, so should have Georgia and Ukraine, who always get the shit end of the stick.
In 2008, Georgia was defenceless against putler’s filthy savagery. It was obvious that both should have joined then.
“Ukraine is next.” That prophetic quote was from John McCain’s running mate: Sarah Palin, back in 2008.
Saakash stepped down after completing his legal two term limit. The collective west then stood by as putler took over via his puppet Ivanishvili. When putler failed to do the same thing in Ukraine, he unleashed literal hell on earth.
Shame, shame, shame on you the collective west. In particular France and Germany, who enriched the putler murder gang colossally at Ukraine and Georgia’s expense.
And then we come to Bill Clinton, who masterminded the shitshow known as Budapest and pressured Ukraine into signing a completely worthless document.
He has apologized, but so far the US and U.K. have refused to honour their obligations.
Membership of Nato and the EU is still many years away for Ukraine and Georgia; because that is what the members want. Several of whom are treacherous scum like Orbanistan and Slovakia.
Selected comments from DT readers:
Andrew Dykes
There have been few occasions in history when being timid has been wise. For the sake of the world, for the sake of freedom, we need to provide Ukraine with what it needs to drive out the Russian bullies as soon as possible. Otherwise they’ll just be back.
A putler groveller writes:
William Stewart
Four problems with these suggestions. Napoleon and Hitler’s invincible armies failed to conquer Russia. I live in the US, and the American military has little faith in NATO. NATO members will run away if faced with a Stalingrad. Sanctions. don’t work. About 100 countries ignored them, and India now gets 40% of its crude oil from Russia, up from 3%. Sanctions hurt Europe more than anyone else. The ruble is back to pre-war levels. More sanctions would be a stupid idea.
The DT is in denial, but Ukraine has lost the war. It is running out of men and the Americans will soon stop sending weapons, The US will probably pull out of NATO if Trump is reelected, he thinks it offers the US little in return for protection. The EU countries won’t fight Russia, I spent time in Eastern Europe during the Cold War. They will surrender rather than watch their cities and economies destroyed.
Britain needs to work out its own survival, its allies are unreliable.
Andrew Dykes
Reply to William Stewart
I see the shifts in St Petersburg started early today.
Another asshole troll:
Nicholas Loup
Lord Ashcroft is overlooking Chancellor Merkel’s promise that the Ukraine would not be admitted to NATO and that to do so would risk a nuclear world war three.
If Russia did not have a huge nuclear arsenal his suggestion would make sense.
Phil Dawes
The case of Alexandra Skochilenko in Russia reveals the effort that the Russian government is undertaking to silence its own population. It is insane that someone gets a seven year prison sentence for writing facts. Of course not in Putin’s Russia.
This should tell you everything you need to know about Putin’s special military operation.
Kremtroll alert:
Reply to Phil Dawes
What is insane is that in Bidens America, you can be held in jail for over 1000 days and given multiple year sentences for walking peacefully through the Capital Building or in the case of some, 22 years for not even being in Washington that day. Yet in Europes most corrupt country ( Ukraine) the government postponed elections, outlawed the Orthodox Church, press gangs it’s citizens and steals massive amounts of money and armaments without any auditing at all and Western nations are supposed to carry on ad infinitum, when there could have been a negotiated settlement within 2 weeks if not for the UK and the USA scuttling the talks. Nato broke its promises not to advance eastwards towards Russia, so I think if it was put towards us ordinary people, this would be over very quickly.
Phil Dawes
NATO operates an open door policy, why should the Kremlin decide who is allowed to join?
For those who enjoy facts, please read the 1997 Russia-NATO founding act.
excellent comment from :
Aj Arn
The author hasn’t done his homework on this topic.
Ukraine & Georgia were both intended to be granted Membership Action Plans at NATO’s Bucharest Summit in 2008, strongly supported by the US, UK and Canada.
Merkel & Sarkozy vetoed what would have been the two Aspirants’ Rapid Path to Membership then, as part of their Ostpolitik of Appeasing Putin, whom they had got invited to NATO’s Summit, one of the most foolish of their Ostpolitik mistakes. They are responsible for Putin using this delay in Membership-progressing to invade first Georgia then Ukraine.
Scholz & MicroN used an illegal European Council the week before the Vilnius NATO Summit to effectively manoeuvre — completely contrary to the TEU — the entire EU to join another effective veto on Ukraine’s NATO Membership-progression: illegally preempting the NATO Summit’s Consensus-building Process, to the fury and disappointment of Zelensky, presumably with Sleepy Joe’s happy, and illegal, collusion.
Leaving Britain, Canada et al out in the cold.
Nick DiLello
Absolutely 💯 % correct! We need to WORK toward NATO membership for Ukraine, this should be should be as much a focus as the actual war, this is their guarantee of peace.
Paul Neczypir
As my cousin in Sumy says again and again: “People must not fear Putin.”
That’s the key. The problem is that old man Biden clearly does fear him.
Still, one thing we can glean from the comments from St Petersburg here is that the Putin clearly does fear NATO. Really fears it.
Robert Alan Sutton
Reply to Paul Neczypir –
Correct. And don’t forget, unlike NATO, unlike “the West”, Ukrainians are not afraid of the Russians.
Russia has nothing to offer anyone beyond destruction, kidnapping and indoctrinating children and a perverted ethno-nationalistic pseudo culture occasionally masquerading as Christian when it is anything but.
Keith Cobby
This article has been written hundreds of time since the conflict started, but still nobody has suggested a coalition to push Russia out of Ukraine.
Star comment from :
Peter Jenkins
I fear Ashcroft has a point. The West has been worrying about Putin escalating the war and have been dilatory in providing Ukraine with the battle winning equipment is so needs. Had we done so within months of Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, I suspect that the blow Ukraine struck last year and as a result pushed the Russians back a good distance could have resulted in a knock out blow had we sent them the tanks and artillery that they so badly needed and followed up with the combat aircraft and attack helicopters that would have made mincemeat out of Russian armour.
Putin’s bluff has been called a number of times and he’s done nothing about it. We should now consider what is the right response for the security of Europe as a whole. The analysis must be that granting NATO membership to Ukraine now should be considered as a one-off to preserve the peace in Europe.
Putin’s forces cannot even defeat Ukraine’s so how is he going to cope with NATO turning to him and telling him to withdraw or else face a massive attack on his forces in Ukraine. We should be clear that we will not attack passed the international boundary but that we reserve the right to strike Russian bases that mount attacks against NATO.
Far from WW3 kicking off, he will be hard pressed to do anything else since Ukraine has destroyed so much of his Army and Navy that his Air Force chooses to stay away!
For all those who cry this will lead to WW3, I will say that they really don’t know what they are talking about. The risk is far greater the longer we let this savage and unproved war to continue.
M Cotton
I see the Russian trolls are out in force again in the The Telegraph. It’s funny how they are almost entirely absent from the comments on some Ukraine articles and then they pile in on others. It’s almost like their Russian paymasters choose which articles have rattled Moscow’s cage the most and pass round the instruction for them to blitz the comments.
Clearly the idea that Ukraine could join NATO has put the willies up Putin so the order has gone out to target this article.
Russia is a busted flush, their military, a paper tiger. We’ve already called their bluff during this war a dozen times. Giving Ukraine NATO membership would be met by all the same blood curdling rhetoric as all the rest the support we’ve given them, and the same response – nothing.
As usual, many interesting comments. They reflect our own thoughts.
“For all those who cry this will lead to WW3, I will say that they really don’t know what they are talking about. The risk is far greater the longer we let this savage and unproved war to continue.”
I’ve been saying this since the beginning; there will be no nuclear war. The powers to be in mafia land simply love their luxurious lives too much to trade them for a life in a dank bunker, never to see sunlight or to breathe fresh air again, not even for Crimea. It’s all rattling of swords to intimidate the meek (Biden, Scholz, Macron, et al.)
After seeing the performance of our various leaders, I have very little confidence in our capabilities if china should start its own “special military operation”. We’ve let this war in Ukraine rage for too long already. We have shown mostly weakness. This is not impressive for the various trash countries on this planet in a deterrent type of way.