Last week's NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania, may not have yielded a concrete timetable for Ukraine's path to NATO membership, causing some to view it as a personal setback for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. However, the summit's outcomes demonstrate NATO has gone above and beyond Zelenskyy's expectations. While the absence of a formal invitation reflects a cautious approach by NATO member states, aiming to avoid further tensions with Russia, Ukraine has secured significant victories: a generous pledge for financial and military assistance and the creation of the NATO-Ukraine Council. The summit resounded with resolute pledges to offer substantial military and economic assistance to Ukraine.

Additionally, Ukraine will engage in F-16 fighter jet training with 11 partner countries, enhancing its defense capabilities. Notably, Germany pledged a substantial 700 million euros ($787.76 million) in further military assistance. The formal affirmation in the final communique that "Ukraine's future is in NATO" is certainly a big win for Zelenskyy. Furthermore, there were discussions among certain NATO members, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, about establishing enduring security guarantees similar to the U.S.-Israel alliance. While Ukraine's immediate path to membership remains uncertain, these developments highlight the centrality of Ukraine's position in the European arena at the moment. U.S. President Joe Biden has also expressed willingness to a potential security arrangement, contingent upon a cease-fire and a peace accord.

Furthermore, the Vilnius summit also introduced a significant development in the form of the NATO-Ukraine Council. This council aims to establish a dedicated platform for consultation, joint decision-making, and crisis management between Kyiv and the alliance's 31 members. While the council intends to deepen Ukraine's collaboration with NATO, it may inversely exacerbate regional tensions. Moscow perceives the establishment of the NATO-Ukraine Council as an indirect means of granting Ukraine a symbolic "seat at the table" without formal membership status. Skeptics claim this move is part of NATO's long-term expansionist agenda, potentially intensifying the existing tensions in Europe.

Critics further argue that the crisis meetings Kyiv can convene through this council may be viewed as a thinly veiled attempt to provoke Russia and escalate the already strained situation. While the NATO-Ukraine Council is presented as a symbolic show of support for Ukraine, its implications and potential impact on regional stability should not be overlooked. There are concerns that this development may deepen friction between NATO and Russia, heightening geopolitical tensions and further polarizing the region. Detractors contend that NATO's strategic intent in establishing the council indicates the organization's underlying expansionist agenda in Eastern Europe.

The new NATO-Ukraine Council

It is crucial to carefully assess the potential consequences of the NATO-Ukraine Council. While it may serve as a platform for improved communication and cooperation, there is a risk that it could inadvertently contribute to the already fragile situation in the region. Balancing Ukraine's aspirations and regional stability requires delicate diplomacy and a comprehensive understanding of the complex dynamics at play.

NATO's response to Ukraine's request for "fast-track" membership in September 2022 revealed the alliance's reluctance to expedite Ukraine's entry, primarily due to the potential implications of Article 5 in NATO's charter. This article mandates a collective defense response from all member countries in the event of an attack on one member. If Ukraine were to join while the conflict with Russia persists, it would necessitate NATO member countries declaring war on Russia, which raises significant concerns.

During the Vilnius summit, NATO reiterated that Ukraine's membership would be considered "when allies agree and conditions are met," highlighting the decision's dependency on consensus and specific criteria. However, NATO made a notable concession by allowing Ukraine to bypass the Membership Action Plan, a typical step in the entry process.

Zelenskyy is aware that Ukraine cannot join NATO while in a conflict with Russia. He has astutely leveraged this dilemma as a bargaining chip, applying pressure on NATO leadership to secure additional concessions and favors. By utilizing the unresolved question of NATO membership, Zelenskyy aims to achieve favorable outcomes beyond immediate membership. The discussions surrounding Ukraine's NATO membership align with the broader objective of managing Russia's regional influence and safeguarding Europe's security. NATO faces a crucial challenge in determining the conditions for Ukraine's potential membership in the alliance, which is contingent not only on when the war concludes but also on how it concludes.

Putin's interests in 'frozen' conflict

Defining the end of the conflict presents a formidable task for NATO's leadership, as it intertwines with complex factors, including Russian President Vladimir Putin's potential interest in perpetuating a "frozen" conflict. Putin may view Ukraine as a fictitious nation-state and exploit it for political legitimacy. This enigma raises significant questions about the conflict's nature and the feasibility of achieving a definitive resolution when one party has a strategic stake in prolonging the confrontation. The conflict is further complicated by geopolitical dynamics, historical narratives and competing national identities, adding layers of complexity to Ukraine's path to NATO membership.

NATO has approached the end of the war as a clean and definitive moment in discussions thus far. However, the reality is far from guaranteed. If the conflict's conclusion resembles a "frozen conflict" akin to the situation between Moldova and the Russian-backed separatist region of Transnistria, where Moscow can manipulate tensions at will, Ukraine's aspirations for NATO membership may face significant hurdles for an extended period, stretching over years or even decades.

The complexities surrounding the war's resolution and Russia's motivations necessitate a thorough understanding of the situation. NATO must carefully navigate these challenges while considering the long-term implications for regional stability and Ukraine's integration into the alliance. Achieving a durable resolution to the conflict that satisfies all parties involved remains a formidable task that requires thoughtful and nuanced approaches from NATO's leadership.