NATO’s Status – USA Gov Policy

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg recently released the organization’s annual status report

We present his summary:

Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine rages on, there is a new war in the Middle East, and Allies face greater competition from authoritarian states, including China. In addition, we still face a range of other threats to our security, including terrorism, cyber attacks and climate change. The world has become more dangerous, but NATO is stronger.

In 2023, NATO grew bigger and more capable. Finland became a NATO Ally, and we have just welcomed Sweden as well. We continued to strengthen our defences. At our Summit in Vilnius, we agreed robust new plans to defend every inch of Alliance territory. These plans are backed by hundreds of thousands of troops and highly capable air and naval forces at a high state of readiness – and with eight battlegroups on our eastern flank, stretching from the Baltic to the Mediterranean Sea, scalable to brigade size.

In 2023, defence spending increased by an unprecedented 11% across Europe and Canada. Since we agreed the Defence Investment Pledge in 2014, European Allies and Canada will have spent more than USD 600 billion extra on defence. In 2024, we expect two-thirds of Allies to meet or exceed the target of investing 2% of Gross Domestic Product in defence. At the Vilnius Summit, we agreed the Defence Production Action Plan, to ramp up production and replenish our stocks of weapons and ammunition. Billions of dollars of contracts have already been signed with defence industry. This will mean more security for Allies, more supplies for Ukraine, and more highly skilled jobs across Europe and North America.

In addition to strengthening our own collective defence, NATO continues to support Ukraine. Ukraine must prevail as an independent, sovereign nation. If Putin wins, this would send a dangerous message to authoritarian leaders around the world that they can achieve their objectives through war and violence. Supporting Ukraine is not charity, it is in our own security interest.

At the Vilnius Summit, we brought Ukraine closer to NATO than ever before. We established the NATOUkraine Council where we meet to discuss and take decisions on our common security interests, as equals. We are helping to transition Ukraine from Soviet-era to NATO equipment and standards. We have also removed the requirement for a Membership Action Plan, significantly shortening Ukraine’s path to membership. All Allies agree that Ukraine will become a member of NATO.

China is watching our actions closely. China does not share our values, it challenges our interests, and Beijing is increasingly aligned with Moscow. We will continue to trade and engage with China, but we must manage the risks and prepare for enduring competition.

NATO is a regional alliance that faces global challenges, so our partnerships around the world are essential for our security. We continue to work closely with the European Union on a wide range of security issues. We are also deepening our cooperation with our partners in the Indo-Pacific – Australia, Japan, New Zealand and the Republic of Korea – and I have appointed a group of experts to review NATO’s approach to our southern neighbourhood.

2024 marks the 75th anniversary of the NATO Alliance. In all those years, the bond between Europe and North America has kept our nations secure and our people safe. At the Washington Summit in July, we will send a powerful message of unity, solidarity and resolve – to prevent war and preserve peace.

Shattered Peace: Responding to Russia’s Aggression

NATO tried to build a partnership with Russia for decades. Over the past decade, however, Russia has continuously violated the norms and principles that have contributed to a stable and predictable European security order. Russia’s brutal and illegal war of aggression against Ukraine, launched in February 2022, has shattered the hard-earned peace in Europe.

As NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept makes clear, the Russian Federation is the most significant and direct threat to Allies’ security, and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area. Russia seeks to establish spheres of influence and direct control through coercion, subversion, aggression and annexation. It uses conventional, cyber and hybrid means against NATO and its partners. Its coercive military posture, rhetoric and proven willingness to use force to pursue its political goals undermine the rules-based international order. The Russian Federation is modernising its nuclear forces and expanding its novel and disruptive dual-capable delivery systems, while employing coercive nuclear signalling. It aims to destabilise countries to our East and South. In the High North, its capability to disrupt Allied reinforcements and freedom of navigation across the North Atlantic is a strategic challenge to the Alliance. Moscow’s military build-up, including in the Baltic, Black and Mediterranean Sea regions, along with its military integration with Belarus, challenge the Alliance’s security and interests.

In light of its hostile policies and actions, NATO cannot consider Russia to be a partner. Any change in the relationship depends on Russia halting its aggressive behaviour and fully complying with international law. NATO remains willing to keep open channels of communication with Moscow to manage and mitigate risks, prevent escalation and increase transparency. NATO does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to Russia.

At the Vilnius Summit in July, Allies agreed to continue to consult on and assess the implications of Russia’s policies and actions for Allied security, and respond to Russian threats and hostile actions in a united and responsible way.

Photo: Meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Foreign Ministers’ Session (NATO)

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.