FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
Prevention is not enough. Putin must be defeated unequivocally, he and his murderous generals must be brought to justice. The alternative – losing Ukraine – could sound the death knell for NATO itself.
Was this the week Ukraine lost the war? Or to put it another way, the week the West lost Ukraine? Heroic battlefield resistance continued, Ukrainian citizens fought back in the teeth of merciless atrocities like the rocket attack on Kiev's Okhmatdyt Children's Hospital – but in Washington, NATO's risk-averse leaders stuck stubbornly to the road map to defeat.
The extremely cautious US President Joe Biden, whose political weakness grows by the day, says the 32-nation alliance is the strongest the world has ever seen. But what good is an alliance that fears a war? Rarely has the gulf between the rhetoric of solidarity and a shocking political refusal to confront Russian brutality directly been so long.
This gap could be fatal for Ukraine and NATO. Alliance leaders agree that Moscow's pushback is vital to Europe's future security and the rule of international law. But their new pact helps Kiev simply survive, not win. They have no plan for victory over Russia. In fact, they seem to fear her. This is an open invitation to President Vladimir Putin for a new aggression in Eastern Europe.
The latest NATO aid included several air defense systems, aircraft and money. It offered Ukraine a "bridge" to "irreversible" membership, which, if the US and Germany prevail, may never happen. Following the grim pattern of the past two years, it was too little, too late, and it won't stop Moscow's sneering war criminal in chief.
"When the dust settles after all the convoys leave Washington, there will be the same uncertainty in Ukraine as before the summit. Brutal war on the front lines, daily Russian bombing and drone attacks against Ukrainian civilians and infrastructure [and] a Putin who believes he can still win ," former US ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker wrote.
Volker warned that, despite the self-congratulations of the 75th anniversary summit, "fundamental questions about the future of war and peace in Europe will remain unanswered." As repeatedly called for here, he said NATO should implement a protective air umbrella over western and southwestern Ukraine and accelerate its NATO and EU membership.
Keir Starmer said Ukraine could still use UK-made Storm Shadow missiles to strike Russian territory "for defensive purposes". But Biden still refuses to allow Kiev to strike the missile and bomber bases deep inside Russia used to launch attacks like the one on the Okhmatdyt hospital. The restrictions also apply to newly supplied F-16 fighters. Biden's personal health and age problems, dramatized by last week's excruciating press conference gaffes, were an unfortunate distraction at a summit meant to project Western unity and prowess.
Amid an escalating political and media firestorm over his ability to run again, NATO nemesis Donald Trump lurks ominously in the shadows. Mark Rutte, the former Dutch prime minister, was chosen as NATO's next secretary general in part because of his ability to keep up with Trump. But no amount of male liaisons and flattery obscures the fact that the Republican nominee is a fan of Putin, who plans to dictate a "peace" solution to Ukraine.
If Trump returns it is entirely possible that NATO's "irreversible" pledges will stand, US bilateral aid will cease, Putin will be rewarded for aggression with permanent territorial gains. America's allies last week will be threatened again with the withdrawal of American defense.
There was more bad news for Ukraine last week from France. President Emmanuel Macron, a champion of Kiev's cause and a passionate advocate of European common defense, is on his feet after his party's defeats in parliamentary elections. Macron is widely described as emaciated, even a lame duck. But much of this analysis comes from commentators who wrongly predicted a far-right victory. Macron deserves credit for demonstrating that Europe's rising tide of nationalist-intolerant populism can be reversed.
His determination to defeat Putin's Russia, which he sees as a mortal threat, is not shared by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, the EU's other major player. Too scared of nuclear escalation, he has been Ukraine's last procrastinator. The epitaph for Scholz: he understood that the 2022 invasion marked a historic starting point - a Zeitenwende - then failed to rise to the challenge.
NATO and the West face several other potentially existential problems. The alliance has not yet convincingly defined its role in the post-Soviet era. The Balkans in the late 1990s were a mess, Afghanistan a disaster. Members debate Gaza as well as Ukraine. And now it's China, the covert military backer of Putin's war.
Instead of striving for new global challenges and missions, NATO should focus on proactively confronting the extremely dangerous threat on Europe's eastern borders. It is the same threat that prompted the founding of the alliance in 1949. Russia remains NATO's reason for existence. Always has been.
Prevention is not enough. Putin must be defeated unequivocally, he and his murderous generals must be brought to justice. The alternative - the loss of Ukraine - could sound like a death knell for NATO itself./ Adapted "Pamphlet" from "The Guardian"
Lini një Përgjigje