this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
105 points (96.5% liked)

World News

32291 readers
532 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
105
NATO stops short of Ukraine invitation, angering Zelenskyy (www.aljazeera.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I have to believe this is just posturing for the people at home on the part of Zelenskyy. He has to know immediate membership of Ukraine into NATO means direct war with Russia leading to nuclear escalation, as Ukraine would immediately invoke Article 5.

Just saying "Ukraine will be invited to NATO once the conflict is over" is enough; it means whatever territory Russia gets to keep over the course of this conflict is it, because then Ukraine becomes NATO territory. It forces Russia to try and win it all (which they can't) because there won't be another invasion of Ukraine.

[–] ritswd 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, that’s what I’ve been thinking too. Zelenskyy had to know that a NATO invitation right now is not realistic. I think it’s posturing to invite constituents in other countries to also act offended that Ukraine isn’t helped more, which then would be in the form of more war support, since it can’t really be much else. Can’t blame him for always taking all opportunities to get more support.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Since yesterday I've been wondering:

If NATO declares that Ukraine joins after the war, wouldn't that mean for Putin that he can't sell a peace deal to his people?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

I think you're right. And I think NATO wants Russia to completely commit to a war they can't win until the government collapses and/or rethinks its global strategy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Not really. He controls the media narrative in Russia, he can tell his people whatever he wants, and hypocrisy and contradictions has never been any problem for him. He has already long since altered his reasons for attacking Ukraine and succesfully fed the Russian population those reasons, and he will keep doing it every time reality threatens to undermine his lies.

[–] dudebro 1 points 1 year ago

So tired of people saying we shouldn't fight Russia because they may fight back.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm sure Zelenskyy knows this isn't realistic, it's just politicking.

[–] Waldhuette 2 points 1 year ago

Yes absolutely. Nobody should expect them to join antyime soon

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If they offer an invitation right now, then this is no longer a war between Ukraine and Russia, it will be a war between NATO and Russia. How do you think that ends?

WW3 may be the last world war. No one is eager to start it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't know with what weapons world war 3 will be fought, but world war 4 will be fought with sticks and stones.

It's usually attributed to Einstein but I'm not sure if that's true. It's hard to believe any quote that's attributed to him at this point, honestly.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

"Don't believe online quote attributions" - Albert Einstein.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It ends with Russia losing. As long as NATO makes it explicitly clear they will not attack Russian territory nor violate Russian sovereignty Russia has no basis to escalate beyond Ukraine. A nuclear war between Russia and NATO would result in the total destruction of Russia (and everything else of course). Russia wouldn't start one unless they felt their existence was threatened.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

They do feel their existence is threatened since NATO expended to the east in 1999.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It already has been a war between Russia and Nato. Where do you think Ukraine is getting all of their military equipment?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think it’s obvious there’s a difference between lend-lease support of a nation defending itself and full on world war.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The difference is we can use Ukraine as a proxy and don't have to send our own children to die. This war could last for 100 years and the only cost is NATO treasure, plus Ukrainian and Russian blood.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It’s that and more. But yes

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actually there's no military difference except Russia will implode because of the news alone.

Now, until it implodes there's simply no realistic chance any nukes will fly from Russia. After it implodes, the chance is minimal, though there may be some nuclear blackmail like what North Korea does, always ending with a humanitarian shipment of grain or something.

The whole point of all this maneuvering is to preserve Russia's integrity. This is why weaponry given to Ukraine is limited in class and modernity.

This is rather cruel to Ukrainians (and Russians, because also means that NATO countries are not interested in real regime change, they are interested in controlling the current regime), but is really obvious.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don’t disagree with most of what you said. But NATO getting fully and directly involved - As in moving in with 10s of thousands of troops to take part of Ukraine that Russia has claimed (Eg Crimea) would be a massive escalation, and I don’t think there’s a credible military or geopolitics expert who would disagree.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I don't see NATO putting boots on the ground TBF. Bombs, missile strikes, limited activity of special forces, jamming etc, - possible.

It's just too convenient to have Ukraine pay the price in lives. Ukrainian military may be getting more experience than any spectator, even a spectator with access to data from them, but it's less qualified to use that experience for improvement, while NATO militaries are very well qualified.

Also the war going on is in some sense stability, while the war ending would be destabilization in the same sense. They just prefer things moving slowly.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was also under the impression that it was standard practice not to admit new NATO members currently engaged in a conflict. Quickly skimming through the literature though, doesn't seem like it's a hard and fast rule.

[–] Ab_intra 5 points 1 year ago

Yes and NATO will not admit them unless the war is over. But I would imagine when the war is over they might make a quick proses out of it.

[–] Raphael -2 points 1 year ago

Does Zelensky actually think he's joining NATO? America won't let go of such an easy proxy war puppet otherwise NATO would have 60+ members by now.