Conceptual games

The New York Times writes that the Alliance has abandoned the concept of "deterrence by retaliation" and opted for "deterrence by denial." In other words, the Alliance officially declares that it will not tolerate any further occupation of the territories of its member states. At the same time, the subtexts of the "leaks," which currently provide a more or less clear picture of the future concept, refer to NATO's eastern flank, primarily the Baltic states and Poland.

Of course, the lessons of the Russian invasion and the atrocities of the Muscovites in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine have caused indignation and rejection around the world. Especially in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Poland, where the memory of the realities of Moscow's rule is still alive, as are the witnesses of the communist dictatorship. It was here, after February 24, 2022, that a new realization emerged that the Russians, after twenty years of Putinism, had become more cruel and relentless, that the Kremlin old man would stop at nothing, even genocide, to fulfil his own ambitious, maniacal ideas of restoring the great Gulag on the territory of the former USSR. Hence the active support of Ukraine in its resistance to the newest horde, and advocacy for Kyiv in international organizations, including NATO. It was on the eastern flank of the Alliance that the idea of a political solution to Ukraine's accession to the Alliance was born, and this idea gained especially realistic shades after Finland and later Sweden rapidly joined NATO.

“It was on the eastern flank of the Alliance that the idea of a political solution to Ukraine's accession to the Alliance was born, and this idea gained especially realistic shades after Finland and later Sweden rapidly joined NATO”

If this happens (God willing!), it will be Eastern Europe that will become the destroyer of the long-held (since the beginning of the twentieth century) stereotypes of the bipolar world of the Cold War, founded on the arrangement of so-called "gray zones" between dictatorships and democracies, on the idea of "showcases" of the Western world on the borders with the wild East. The sweet illusions that the Russians, having a great example of their neighbors’ prosperity, would deal with the "autocrats" on their own by electing an adequate and democratic government, dissipated like the morning fog.

In fact, the New York Times hints that the concept of "deterrence by denial" means, on the contrary, the permanent deployment of allied troops near the border with Russia (the text is italicized by me - Author's note), greater integration of American and allied military plans, higher military spending, and more detailed requirements for allies to have specific types of forces and equipment available for combat operations if necessary.

"The intention is to make NATO’s forces not only more robust and more capable but also more visible to Russia, a key element of deterrence."

“The concept of "deterrence by denial" means, on the contrary, the permanent deployment of allied troops near the border with Russia, greater integration of American and allied military plans, higher military spending, and more detailed requirements for allies to have specific types of forces and equipment available for combat operations if necessary”

But having said "A," the Alliance must continue with the alphabet. Without any compromises and demagogic rhetoric such as "Ukraine's failure to meet certain criteria" and so on. I have already written before that in certain circles in the West (mostly incorporated into international security and other structures), after Finland's rapid accession to the Alliance, there is an idea to apply the experience of "neutral Suomi" by shifting it a little to the South, i.e. to "Finlandize" Ukraine. Moreover, the Financial Times published information, citing four people in the know, that the United States, Germany, and Hungary are strictly against not only Kyiv's accelerated accession, but also its invitation to join NATO at the Vilnius summit. If we put aside the pro-Russian position of Budapest, which has almost officially joined the "axis of evil" and cannot help but produce anti-Ukrainian ideas, the position of Washington and Berlin does look strange. Firstly, when it comes to military standards or weapons unification, it is the US and Germany that know Ukraine is ready, and secondly, the US and German military have repeatedly stated that the Ukrainian Armed Forces are superior to NATO armies that lack real combat experience.

“Firstly, when it comes to military standards or weapons unification, it is the US and Germany that know Ukraine is ready, and secondly, the US and German military have repeatedly stated that the Ukrainian Armed Forces are superior to NATO armies that lack real combat experience”

Yes, of course, NATO does not need another Hungary in its ranks, and the current political elite in Ukraine has not yet been able to rid itself of Moscow's agents of influence, people with rather dubious connections. And these connections, to put it mildly, dictate the rules of the game and the actions of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. Add to this Zelenskyy's fear of losing power, which will definitely raise a lot of personal questions about preparations for war and beyond.   

But... Despite all the precautions - often far-fetched, but also real - if NATO maintains the status quo with regard to Ukraine after Vilnius, the new NATO concept will not be worth a damn. "Deterrence by denial"? And how will Brussels then react to Russian missiles falling on the territory of Romania or Poland (even if they are shot down by Ukrainian air defense, and, by the way, soon by American Patriot)? Will they be looking for a gray cat in a dark room again? What will be the response to the attacks of Russian attack aircraft over the Black Sea against American (read NATO) drones? Will Moscow get the text of the new concept?

Churchill, whom both Ukrainian and foreign figures like to quote in the context of the Russian-Ukrainian war, said "if you're going through hell, keep going." No, those who give up on "going" will obviously not turn into a pillar of salt, like the wife of the Old Testament Lot. But the future will surely recognize them as politicians' filibusters who had a chance but failed to take it.

About the author. Ihor Hulyk is a journalist and Espreso TV website’s editor-in-chief.

The editorial staff do not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.