NATO is likely to tell Ukraine that its path toward NATO membership is “irreversible” during the alliance’s summit that has begun in Washington, POLITICO reported on Tuesday.
The report said the language is already included in a draft version of the communique that’s set to be released on Wednesday. The text will be finalized on Tuesday night, but it has already been approved by the US and other major NATO countries.
The POLITICO report said the inclusion of the language would be a “stunning development” for Ukraine and a “major defeat” for Russia. But there’s no sign that Ukraine will be given a clear road map toward membership at the summit, meaning the communique will be another empty promise designed to continue the proxy war.
The issue of Ukraine’s potential NATO membership was a major motive for Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine. During the lead-up to the invasion, the US refused to engage seriously with Russia’s demand for the US to give a guarantee that Ukraine wouldn’t be admitted into NATO despite telling Kyiv behind the scenes that there would be no membership for at least a decade.
Ukraine was first promised it would eventually become a NATO member at a 2008 summit in Bucharest, despite the issue being a major red line for Russia. At the time, then-US Ambassador to Russia William Burns, the current CIA director, warned against promising NATO membership to Ukraine and Georgia. He said the vow touches a “raw nerve” in Russia and raises serious security concerns for Moscow.
In a cable published by WikiLeaks, Burns wrote: “Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests.”
Since the Russian invasion, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been looking for a clear path to NATO membership and stronger commitments. He was furious at last year’s NATO summit in Vilnius when the alliance issued a vague communique that said it “will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met.”
A Ukrainian official who spoke with POLITICO about this year’s NATO summit said other NATO members want stronger language than the US. “We’ve had sort of an agreement with the United States, so it will be really clear that the path to membership is irreversible. But other allies are really pushing for a stronger wording,” said Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration Olha Stefanishyna.
“Great Britain, France, our Baltic friends” all want to make sure that the wording in the declaration is stronger than what the US has pushed, and leaves no room for doubt,” Stefanishyna added.
Wonderful, when Russia fully conquers Ukraine and arranges for a leadership Russia favors, Ukraine will irreversibly head into NATO membership, creating the collective security architecture including Russia that they have been calling for for years.
Russia “fully” conquering Ukraine? At the rate their going it might be 100 years!
C’mon, son. You’re not watching what’s going on there. Russia is running out of steam and the Western weapons keep coming. It’ll be up to the Ukes to decide what to do next. Maybe they stay on Active Defense or maybe they decide to start taking back Crimea. Won’t be easy but they might decide to go for it.
I don’t know that the Russian forces are necessarily “running out of steam.” They might be able to keep this up for 10-20 years before slinking home like they, then the US, did from Afghanistan.
On the other hand, if I was Vladimir Putin, I’d have Mike Campbell’s bankruptcy much in mind. From The Sun Also Rises:
“How did you go bankrupt?” Bill asked.
“Two ways,” Mike said. “Gradually and then suddenly.”
I doubt they'll "slink" away from Ukraine the same way they did from Afghanistan. Unless you mean from the eastern part. Or by force. Ukraine doesn't become less of a problem by slinking away.
They've already been at it for 10 years and Ukraine has had 8 years to prep up till 2022.
Afghanistan reference is not applicable and it definitely won't pan out that way.
We've heard all the BS and Empire spins over the last 2 1/2 years and the Ukraine/Empire is slowly coming to terms with this.
The only thing more delusional is the sheer BS on Biden's mental state and the audacity that Jill, I mean Joe, stating (s)he will run in 2024. That's ok since, "we have the ability to see what can be, unburdened by what has been, and then to make the possible actually happen."
M'kay?
PS – can't wait for the upcoming newsflash that Joe will have to pull out of the race due to undisclosed medical reasons qualifying that his cognitive function is top notch and that he can still carry his golf bag.
I don't know where you get the "Russia is running out of steam" you keep repeating. And the weapons that will keep coming will be no more than enough to maintain the previous stalemate. Without direct help from NATO/US that is the best Ukraine can hope for. And by "direct" help, I mean bodies.
Giving ground and taking ground. Sure looks like a loss of steam…
So, you don't have an answer.
You mean Russia keeps moving forward, Ukraine's manpower shortage keeps getting worse despite using inmates, and Russia is vastly out producing NATO with shells and other basic critical arms. Meanwhile, the west continuing to pour scarce money into a lost cause is increasingly becoming a big political liability. It might take 10 years from now for Ukraine to collapse, but Russia is patient when it comes to their core interests.
Sure it is. Keep the hopium going!
There won't be a full conquest.
Russia will keep expanding to the west leaving a rump state that should be renamed "Polska Wschodnia" (Eastern Poland) . This will allow for a historical realignment to what it used to be up until the late 1700s as part of the Polish-Lithuanian Comonwealth.
Vlad the Lesser has already set it up by cleansing Orthodoxy and the Russian language as well as changing Christmas from Jan. 7 to Dec. 25.
Perfect fit for NATO and Russia will reclaim it's historical territory. Also great for Blackrock and Vanguard since they will have way less to rebuild. On the other side of the DMZ, Russia will have more wheatfields and gas pumps.
Win-win. Peace? Who the hell needs peace?
Slava Polska Wschodnia!
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9684a1eb8280569312388bd0531eb92fc27f6350c9962e743646c24985f5ed5e.png
This development, should it happen, would ensure the loss of the south and east of Ukraine to provide the buffer area Russia needs in the Novorussia area. The rump Ukraine left near Poland and Hungary could then indeed join Nato as another basket case eastern european security liability.
Ukraine will be defeated and become part of Russia.
Will the last Ukrainian turn off the reaming single light bulb.
Straussian neocons must be laughing their asses off. Depopulate Ukraine, done. Deindustrialize Germany, done. Bring NATO and Russia to the brink of WWIII, done. They must be slapping each other on their backs and breaking out the champaign.
I agree it's irreversible. So is the war with Russia, China, and Iran. We think we can prevent it. We are dead wrong. …Sorry. My mistake. We're not only dead wrong–we are also very stupid.
Not all of us are that stupid, but it is true of the power elite.
They are criminally stupid and mentally retarded that includes all the donors who put them there in the first place.
It is limitless insanity we will have to pay for.
Keep screaming into the sky about WWIII. Nobody’s willing to f**knwith NATO. Everyone but the tankies here can see the difference between Russian war gear and US war gear. China is a regional power at best and they’re so intertwined with the US economy, they won’t do s**t.
But if it makes you feel like your “in the know”, have at it. You’ll continue to be wrong and sound like scared children.
We haven't seen much difference, except the US gear costs five times more.
Cannot even manufacture 155 howitzer shells fast enough.
Ahh, yes. Abram’s have been destroyed in Ukraine (as have ALL main battle tanks). First difference is Western tanks are designed to allow their crews to survive and fight another day. (That’s NOT what happens to SOVIET/Russian tanks.) And you HAVE seen the video of the Bradley taking out the T-90 right? (Let me know when a Russian IFV destroys a Western tank.)
School yourself a little bit more but for now let the adults talk.
Then why won't NATO send troops?
Supposedly, there are 500,000 troops waiting in the wings.
I would not call your post rational thinking.
I would call it wishful thinking, emotional, not intellectual.
There is no need for Russia to fight a war with NATO. USA, a NATO partner, the leader, is breaking the back of NATO, the pipeline sabotage was a declaration of war by the leader of NATO against Germany, a NATO partner with the help of Norway and Denmark and Sweden a de facto NATO partner. Destroying the German economy is pulling the rug out from under NATO partners who are members of the EU and depend on German economic power. The US wants financial and military support from them. Rational thinking can tell you, they do not like to be bullied and when the time is ripe they will kick the US bully in the A*s. Putin can lean back and watch the end of NATO without lifting a finger. There will be no NATO when the US needs it.
And Biden did it all from the Grassy Knoll!
And, that post came from the Gassy Troll.
Hahaha. That’s was pretty good actually!
No. that was LBJ's boys on the Grassy Knoll.
I’m not arguing the elites are not evil or stupid. I’m arguing we are stupid–Neighbors, friends/acquaintances, and even some of my own family. Talk to people.
I meant not all our friends are that stupid but ALL in the power elite, but they are smart when it is about making big profits.
With every raised pickup I see, American flag flapping on the tailgate, I chuckle. Nervously. So many citizens have been brainwashed to believe that the U.S. is invulnerable.
'Not 1 inch'
NATO is Lucy and Ukraine is Charlie Brown. Now try and kick that football one more time.
LOL!
I think they're both Charlie Brown.
We will soon find out. Ukraine is running out of cannon fodder. Many young Ukrainian men fled to Germany. Germany is not deporting them to serve in Ukraine, but to think for Germans in NATO considering sending their own sons to Ukraine for cannonfodder would be a dicker Hund, as Germans would say.
"We will soon find out. Ukraine is running out of cannon fodder."
You've been saying that for two years now.
How soon is "soon?"
Time is an illusion and the illusion is relative to other factors like speed.
nato is mordor ukarine is the witch king
So is global warming, if these clowns remain in charge.
Ukraine's "path toward NATO membership is “irreversible"" ….. and that will happen immediately after the last Ukrainian.
Not sure what is "stunning" about this, as it no more than reiterates what was said in Bucharest in 2008. ("NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO.") How is saying that the Ukraine's path to membership is "irreversible" any different, any stronger, or any more specific as to when this will actually happen, than saying that it "will become" a member? Or, to take just the most recent example, what was repeated at Vilnius last year? ("We reaffirm the commitment we made at the 2008 Summit in Bucharest that Ukraine will become a member of NATO…")
Notice too that the politico article talks about the UK, the Baltic nations, etc, wanting even stronger language, but the USA balking at even "irrerversible." Left unsaid is that other NATO nations (perhaps France and Germany, perhaps Hungary, perhaps others), see the "irreversible" language as already too strong.
In any event, the specific language, the particular verbal formulation, in the end, hardly matters. What matters is the apparent lack of a timetable for membership, which is why the Bucharest 2008 statement has meant less than meets the eye for all these years. And which apparently is going to persist through the current meeting, complete with the standard pompous, but vague, "statement."
ETA: And it is the very lack of a timetable that Zelenksy has sqauwked about in the past, including with respect to last year's NATO meeting at Vilnius:
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky lashed out at NATO on Tuesday for its “unprecedented and absurd” lack of a timetable for when his country will be formally invited to become a member of the military alliance.
https://www.thedailybeast.c… .
All a ruse to "bleed" Russia, much like the knowledge of the coming breakout by Hamas fighters being set aside to be the excuse for expulsion and genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza. Idiots in administrations since W. have had their sights on Russia, to not allow Russia to become an equal. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
"We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO." At that time, polls showed most Ukrainians opposed the idea, so a coup was required in 2014.
It was never clear who "we" was in that statement. President Bush and ? Obviously, not all NATO members agreed or they could have voted to accept Ukraine. They can do that today, but "we" don't agree.
Yeah. The official statement of 3April2008 begins:
“We, the Heads of State and Government of the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance, met today to blah, blah, blah…”
But the part about the Ukraine reads:
“NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO….”
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm
So, who, exactly, is the “we” that “agreed” on that day that the Ukraine “will become” a NATO member? Just those particular statesmen who attended that meeting? “NATO” as a whole? But NATO, per se, doesn’t actually “welcome” new members, its existing members do. The “O” in NATO stands for “Organization,” and the organization does not have the autority to expand to include new members. That authority lies with the member states.
As you say, if the member states were REALLY interested in “welcoming” the Ukraine as a new member, they could have done so right then and there (subject to the treaty ratification procedures of each country). At a mininum, some kind of timetable, or framework, could have been laid down. But those things didn’t happen.
Bush got his “consensus.” Which was just a papering over of the fundamental disagreement with France, Germany and others about whether to admit the Ukraine, or not. And that’s where matters have stood ever since…
I checked that link and that document isn't signed by anyone. Also at the top
Issued on 03 Apr. 2008|Last updated: 05 Jul. 2022 16:06
Updated? This means changed.
You're right, of course, but "irreversible" has such a nice tone to it … it will play well on CNNFOXMSNBC, which is all that matters.
One issue: can Biden pronounce "irreversible" w/o two gaffes?
Yeah. At every NATO “summit” there has to be some soundbite that seems to mean that the Kiev Entity will soon be a NATO member, without it ever actually happening. It’s like Zeno’s paradox about Achilles and the tortoise, or perhaps the myth of Sisyphus or Tantalus. The Kiev Entity is forever nearing the goal of NATO membership, and yet it always remains just out of reach!
Speaking of CNN, you no doubt have read about the firing of 100 people working for CNN in favor of utilizing AI in their formulation of news for broadcast. Max Headroom on the horizon? Ain't no joke.
I hadn't heard … very true to form. The best thing about AI is it's cheap and you can still program it to fib sources and news just like regular MSM shills do.
All propaganda verbiage like "the gun is cocked" "patience is not unlimited", "the clock is ticking" and all the other bullshit terms they spit out periodically.
Also, it looks like Wash. and NATO's path to WWIII is also irreversible at the present.
Well, the "pundits" got it wrong again. Everyone expected Zelensky to be told Ukraine was "too corrupt" to join NATO.
Not that this – like most things being reported here today – matters. Because Ukraine will cease to exist as a state this year (or next at the latest.)
nato is a rabid howling pack of dogs and ukariane is the Chihuahua
nato is a stumble of zombies and guess who's coming for dinner?
Mentally common sense healthy people would have stopped the slaughter in Ukraine (and Gaza) a long time ago, they would have prevented it completely. Only demented criminal minds could do what demented Biden and neocons did. It is another unbelievable Biden hell on earth created by the Biden disaster. He and Netanyahu are carbon copies of Hitler, dehumanized megalomaniacs and followers without a human conscience.
Russia can stop the slaughter in Ukraine anytime they want so, f**k off.
What about Zelensky, he could stop it. I recall, Zelensky tried more than once but our demented genocide Joe said no. Of course more likely Joe was told to say no by the people behind the curtain who pull his strings and still try to sell a demented old man for president. The Ukrainian slaughter will be on demented old Joe’s resume. Now you get lost, you are not needed, take Jill and Joe with you.
Ahhh, yes. The man-behind-the-curtain. I love how you jaggoffs simultaneously make Biden a mastermind AND a demented old man. Hahaha
Biden was a master serving his donors, dementia, as you must know, starts later in life. During all the years in government Biden did not grow as a person. If he had, he would have chosen a qualified VP considering his age, and a possible one term presidency.
DEI hire.
His VP is more qualified than the former guy (and Sarah Palin). Your political acumen ineeds some seasoning (or medication).
How so? And believe me I had no use for Saint Mike or the original MTG but Harris' qualifications are what? She's a she and she's black. Two boxes checked.
Russia and Kiev had reached an agreement. Documents were initialed, signed. The chief negotiator for Kiev admitted it was so. Then Boris, most probably at the behest of the U.S., showed up, told them not to sign off on a truce, but to fight on. That was back in 2022. Joe is not calling the shots. It starts with his Chief of Staff (Zients), then Blinken, Sullivan, then Kirby. Joe mimics what he is told. Plus they tell him how omnipotent he is, evidenced by his comment at his interview by Stephonopolous, when he said, "I run the world", "Albright was right". The dim light between his ears is kept running by a hand crank generator.
Boris showed up the day after Sergey Lavrov publicly rejected the deal on behalf of the Russian Federation.
He didn't reject the deal (draft) that was initialed.
No, he rejected the draft as amended by Zelenskyy.
In other words, he rejected the actual offer, as opposed to what subordinates had suggested.
No, the actual offer is the one initialed by both parties. The amended version would have to be initialed by both parties to be an actual offer. And negotiators don't suggest shit, they negotiate under the parameters that the principal's lay out for them.
Zelensky takes orders from Israel via Wash.
Who stopped the slaughter in Donbass oblasts that went on for 8 years? Hmmm? What about the 14,000 Ukraine citizens who were murdered for being opposed to the NAZI administration in Kiev?
Stalemate stopped that “slaughter”. I guess you don’t know that people die in a civil war…
Kiev and their neo-Nazi militias started slaughtering Russians before Russia invaded. Same as Texas when the US invaded to protect the Texans persecuted by Mexico City. Then Wash. took most of Mexico and later paid them for the land they acquired.
Show me proof that the Ukrainians were killing Russians before the invasion. (And it better be a good source.)
A good source being only a western narrative or Ukrainian propaganda monger, right?
Show me from any source then. I thought no Russians were involved in Donbas or Crimea during the civil war? I thought the Russians only entered in 2022? How did the Ukes kill Russians before the invasion in 2022 if none were in Ukraine?
“Prior to the invasion, there had already been eight years of conflict in
eastern Ukraine between Ukrainian Government forces and Russia-backed
separatists.”https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9476/?trk=public_post_comment-text
The “slaughter” had come down to single- and low-double digits annually two years before the Russian invasion.
And a large portion of those “slaughtered” were Ukrainian troops and separatist troops, not non-combatants (only a few hundred were actual Russian regulars).
So if some home invader came into your home and murdered you and your family we would be incorrect in applying the word "slaughter" to the event, because it would be a low number body count?
That's not what I said, nor is it anything resembling anything I've ever implied. My opinion on the Donbas secession was that the Ukrainian regime should have simply let them go in peace.
That doesn't change the FACT that the "slaughter" was mutual, not one-way.
Nor does it change the FACT that the "slaughter" had trailed off to almost nothing. Putin didn’t give a tinker’s dam about the poor suffering Donbas people … until peace threatened to break out.
I think you're exaggerating when you say peace was ready to break out.
According to OHCHR, there were 25 civilians killed in the Donbas in 2021, down from 26 in 2020. And not all of those were due to Ukrainian military activity.
It was a very low-intensity “frozen conflict” for several years prior to February 24, 2022. Do you happen to recall what might have occurred on that date?
Do you recall the constant war games before Feb 24th or the ones planned for that summer?
Ukraine was slaughtering Russians long before Russia invaded. Forget that one?
When was that again?
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9476/?trk=public_post_comment-text
Is "irreversible" the same as "ironclad"?
Zeno's paradox.