BRUSSELS — Western allies are unlikely to invite Ukraine to join NATO during the war but are still negotiating language to signal their long-term commitment to Kyiv, the U.S. ambassador to the alliance told POLITICO.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been imploring NATO leaders in recent weeks to put Ukraine on a concrete path to accession, threatening not to attend the alliance’s annual summit in Vilnius next month if they can’t deliver.
But in an interview with POLITICO at the alliance’s headquarters, U.S. Ambassador Julianne Smith conceded that allies can’t invite Kyiv to join NATO at the moment.
“I think the allies now are in agreement that a proper invitation is unlikely while they’re engaged in a full-scale war,” she said.
But she insisted NATO still wants Ukraine to get the message that it is with the war-torn country for the long haul — and is trying to find a way to show that in Vilnius.
“We want to signal to President Zelenskyy — if he comes in person — we care deeply about having a longer-term relationship with Ukraine and looking for ways to acknowledge, you know, all they’ve accomplished and that our support isn’t going to fade away or that we’re not going to get distracted.”
Ukraine’s dance with NATO is a decade-plus affair.
Back in 2008, NATO leaders meeting in Bucharest made a vague promise that Ukraine would one day become a member. But that has essentially been ignored amid concerns about provoking Russia further.
In recent days, Zelenskyy has publicly acknowledged that he understands Ukraine will not become a NATO member during the war, but nonetheless argued that Ukraine should still get a concrete pledge at Vilnius that it will be welcomed after the war. He is also pushing for binding commitments that NATO allies will protect Ukraine as it works through the membership process.
NATO is currently working on a two-part package for Ukraine. One pillar focuses on practical support — essentially helping Ukraine adopt Western military standards. The other is the thornier political question of what rhetoric to use around Ukraine’s bid.
“Between the issue of a proper invitation and talking about Bucharest, which we all support and stand behind, there is an array of options,” Smith said. “And so part of the task for the alliance right now is to hone in on that and determine exactly what it is that we want to put in this package of deliverables for Ukraine.”
The question has divided the alliance: for months, many Western capitals insisted that serious discussions and pledges about future security arrangements should wait until after the war ended. A number of countries on NATO’s eastern flank, however, have pushed for a substantive gesture for Ukraine now.
But unlike the issue of security guarantees, where thinking remains in the early stages and for the moment outside formal NATO discussions, a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Oslo last week brought the allies closer together on the question of what to offer Ukraine in Vilnius regarding its NATO bid.
“We are much closer to a landing zone than we were three or four months ago,” Smith said.
She credited ministers’ abnormal approach to their talks during the Oslo meeting.
“What really helped was to do something that was a bit unusual for the alliance — and that is to put ministers alone in a room together with no table, and only focus on essentially one subject, and to give them the time to speak freely, without prepared interventions enabled everyone to put their country’s position on the table, but also to debate a little bit,” the American ambassador said.
“I do think it helped us get closer to consensus,” Smith added, “and I too feel better now about where the alliance is headed on this package.”
The discussions come against the backdrop of Ukraine this week launching its much-awaited counteroffensive.
“We want the Ukrainians to continue to undertake efforts that will shift Putin’s strategic calculus, and help him understand that he is failing and that he will not achieve his strategic objectives,” Smith said, “and I think a successful counteroffensive could be helpful in that regard.”
But, the ambassador added, “I think we’re also very clear-eyed that this particular counteroffensive may not determine the end of this war.”