“NATO defense ministers want to upgrade relations with
Ukraine politically. Meanwhile, Turkey is blocking new defense plans to
strengthen the eastern flank.
There are just under four weeks until the NATO summit in
Vilnius. The defense ministers' meeting in Brussels on Friday was the last
meeting at ministerial level to prepare for the upcoming decisions. In the
meantime, the ambassadors in Brussels will continue to wrestle with wording.
All in all, however, it is already becoming apparent what diplomats like to
call the “landing zone”: what the 31 heads of state and government will agree
on. As always in the Alliance, this requires consensus.
The most sensitive issue concerns the future of Ukraine.
There will be no invitation to join, as recently demanded by Ukrainian
President Volodymyr Zelensky, no matter how hard the states on the alliance's
eastern flank may push. A promise that the country will be included immediately
after the end of the conflict cannot be made with the United States either.
Instead, in addition to a support package for non-lethal aid
(to which the alliance is limited), there should be political signals of
rapprochement. This concerns, on the one hand, the upgrading of the previous
NATO-Ukraine Commission to a council in which one also wants to discuss
questions of Euro-Atlantic security on an equal footing.
The North Atlantic
Council has now formally decided to do so after Lithuania gave up its
opposition. The summit host wanted to do more for Kyiv but was isolated.
The two percent mark becomes the lower limit
On the other hand, the Ukraine should be signaled that they
will not need a Membership Action Plan, or MAP for short, if they join.
"There are increasing signs that everyone can agree on
this," said Defense Minister Boris Pistorius on Friday. North Macedonia,
for example, was recently prepared for its admission with such plans, which
define military and political reforms. Of course, they are not mandatory, and
they were never discussed for Finland and Sweden.
When NATO promised Ukraine membership in 2008, Germany and
France prevented the country from getting a MAP – so as not to provoke Russia.
At the time, it was argued that a MAP would create some sort of moral, if not
legal, obligation to alliance defense. In this respect, it should not have been
difficult for US President Joe Biden to give up this requirement. Zelenskyj, on
the other hand, could present it as a success. The Ukrainian President is
expected to come to Vilnius and take part in a symbolic first session of the
NATO-Ukraine Council. It is still unclear whether the country will also receive
security promises. In any case, this is a matter for individual states, not for
the Alliance.
Consensus is also emerging on the second hot topic – defense
spending. The member states will declare the previously "desired"
target of spending two percent of their economic power on this as binding - as
a new lower limit ("floor"). The allies have noticed that Germany is
already messing about with the new security strategy; it is sometimes commented
on with raised eyebrows.
New defense plans for Alliance territory
However, the Bundeswehr will have enough money available
over the next four years with the special fund to reach the two percent -
that's exactly what the additional 100 billion euros were calculated for. It's
just a matter of spending them quickly, too. The real problem will only arise
in 2028, when the defense budget would suddenly have to increase by 20 billion
euros.
Of course, Germany is not the problem in the NATO debate.
Other states, including large ones like Canada and Turkey, spend less on their
defense. Luxembourg brings up the rear with 0.6 percent, although it spends
more per capita than any other country in absolute terms - the Grand Duchy is
simply too rich, the economic power too great. Of course, the alliance cannot
be based on the smallest member. The heads of government will probably only
agree on the final formulation in Vilnius, say diplomats, but the direction is
clear.
The new defense plans, which the military headquarters have
been working on for months, are also to be adopted in Vilnius. For the first
time since the Cold War, NATO will have “workable” plans for defending all of
its territory, with troops assigned to specific scenarios. From this, in turn,
the troop levels and military capabilities of the member states are derived.
Türkiye's blocking attitude causes shaking of heads
Stoltenberg speaks of the fact that more than 300,000 troops
would be held at three different levels of readiness. People in the Member
States, including Germany, don't like to hear that because it will take a lot
of effort to get there. It is questionable, for example, whether the Bundeswehr
can keep its promise to provide the alliance with a fully equipped armored
division from 2025 and another from 2027. The army inspector has already warned
internally of delays.
The core of the new plans, which are classified as secret,
is the rapid reinforcement of the eastern flank. In the event of an escalation,
the forces stationed there, currently battalion strength, are to grow to
brigade level. The leading nations are responsible for this, Germany in the
case of Lithuania. The government there is already pushing for a higher
Bundeswehr presence. Pistorius wants to address the concerns in the Baltic States
by practicing more and more often there. The defense ministers of the three
Baltic states and the leading nations met on Thursday evening. Pistorius then
announced that at the end of next year, beginning of 2025, all forces would
hold a regional maneuver for the first time.
Actually, the defense plans should already be approved by
the ministers in Brussels. But that failed because of Türkiye. Ankara vetoed
and justified this with formal questions. For example, Cyprus is to be
designated as a "Cypriot island" on maps in order to do justice to
the unclear status of the Turkish-occupied north. Many ministers shook their
heads uncomprehending. One reportedly vented his displeasure behind closed
doors: Britain's Ben Wallace. On D-Day 1944, the Allies did not argue about
what to call the English Channel, he is said to have said.
The Turkish blockade game is well known. In fact, Ankara is
probably trying to get the US to deliver F-16 aircraft. Presidents Biden and
Erdogan recently spoke about it again. This question is also – indirectly –
linked to Sweden's accession. There is still hope in the alliance that 32
member states will meet in Vilnius."
What do security promises from individual NATO states for
Ukraine mean in reality? If individual NATO states acting according to
those promises will attack Russia, does all NATO step in and declare
World war III? Alternatively, are these promises empty sounds from
woke governments of some countries drowning in internal political
troubles, and desperately seeking a distraction?
