Eyes on Kiev

Will he be extraordinary for another reasons? Can we anticipate any groundbreaking decisions?

I wouldn't anticipate a breakthrough. More like another confirmation of the direction NATO's heading. The announced key issue will be the war in Ukraine and the future of this country. This is already indicated by the subject of the summit, which this year reads: "Ukraine and Transatlantic Security". The Alliance became very powerfully active in defending Ukrainian independency and territorial integrity. He put all his authority in the planet on the line. He must so find a way for Ukraine to win this war. She led to favorable decisions at the front, and then possibly during peace negotiations with Russia. And that's what the members of the North Atlantic Council will focus on in Washington.

But what specifics can the Ukrainians offer? A fewer months ago, Jens Stoltenberg announced the creation of a five-year fund of EUR 100 billion, which would improve Ukraine's backing and free it from political turmoil...

...and this task collapsed. Jens Stoltenberg did not gain the support of all NATO members. However, this does not change the fact that assistance to Ukraine will continueWhat's more, it can even be increased 1 way or another. It is not essential to make fresh formal financial and organisational structures. It is adequate that the individual associate States are more active, but besides the Alliance's partners. NATO is invariably the real leader of this process – successfully. It is worth noting that support covers not only the supply of arms and ammunition, but besides operational advice, intelligence and information assistance, and training. How wide is the scope of these types of support, we do not know this, due to the fact that in these segments the majority of data remains classified. However, it can be assumed that NATO has any reserves, which have not yet been used.

But can Ukraine, thanks to the Washington Summit, get even half a step closer to NATO membership?

Definitely. Of course, Kiev will not be officially invited to join. For a simple reason – there is simply a war going on and it is not known erstwhile it will end. NATO doesn't want to become a organization to open war. It does not intend to send troops to Ukraine, due to the fact that in most associate States there is no consent from citizens and voters. Meanwhile, if Ukraine had become a NATO associate before the war ended, The Alliance would be bound by Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

However, NATO may decide to increase its preparatory action. It is already helping Ukrainians in a thorough improvement of the armed forces and state services, the armed industry, strengthening civilian control of the military. Kiev has a truly long way to go from the russian system. I would not regulation out that the leaders of the Alliance will propose a fresh plan for assistance and cooperation for accession, although without a circumstantial date.

And the another lines? Can leaders, for example, return to the substance of expanding NATO consequence Force or transforming battalion conflict groups into brigade groups? That's what we're talking about. during the Madrid Summitbut these declarations have not been full implemented.

In terms of building 300 1000 consequence Forces, the Alliance has done a lot. The next decisions would not be groundbreaking here. As with the expansion of battalion combat groups. Even brigade combat groups would be besides tiny to stand up to the invasion alone. An alliance doesn't work that way. The enhanced presence of forces on the east flank should be read as a demonstration of readiness to engage the full NATO in collective defence of its full territory. A possible attack from the east would automatically be a hit on multinational forces, so it would be a reason to shift the Alliance's troops to the east from another parts of Europe and North America. In this context, multinational combat groups are primarily a means of deterring conventional aggressors from acting and doing so.

The extension of the atomic Sharing programme could be of crucial importance for east flank states. It can be assumed that specified a decision would primarily consequence in the deployment of atomic weapons in Poland, which would importantly change the regional arrangement of forces. These changes would be part of a certain trend, which started in 2016. Not accidentally in the Polish capital – during the NATO Summit in Warsaw “Member State leaders have announced that after decades of reducing the function of atomic deterrence weapons in the Alliance strategy, they will begin to increase this role. The records on this subject were besides included in the fresh strategical concept of the Alliance of 2022. Will the question of atomic Sharing be taken in any way in Washington? hard to say. The thought has as many supporters as opponents.

But moving towards certainty...

The leaders will surely want to show at the summit the strength of transatlantic ties, the importance of collective defence and Article 5. It can besides be expected to item the fact that most associate States have achieved a mark of defence spending of at least 2% of GDP. She even crossed that level. Until now, it has been voluntary – since 2024 it has become compulsory. But the summit will besides uncover another interesting trend. That is, NATO is beginning up to global challenges more rapidly.

How?

Australia, Japan, South Korea and fresh Zealand leaders were invited to the meeting. These countries are Global NATO Partners in the Pacific region and are increasingly approaching the Alliance. Their position is starting to match any of the position enjoyed by Finland and Sweden before they were invited to accession. Of course, extending the Alliance to these states would be a much more complex operation, requiring, among another things, a revision of respective articles of the treaty, but... it is not impossible. but possibly fresh Zealand, who joined the atomic Weapons Prohibition Treaty. The accession of Australia, Japan and South Korea could importantly strengthen NATO. We are talking about economically and militarily strong countries. In addition, the last 2 countries are among respective of the world's largest technological powers.

NATO summit in Vilnius 2023

What is peculiarly important, they are all located in 1 region – the Pacific and East Asia. And this is an area whose importance is peculiarly clearly seen from the US. Many experts and commentators from across the ocean say that the Alliance should change its character from North Atlantic to global and thus relieve the burden on the US and Canada, which are active in Europe's affairs – but it is hard to presume that specified decisions will take place at the Washington Summit. However, it is worth noting a long-term process that takes place before our eyes. Whatever the outcome.

NATO has already drawn attention to this area of the world. At the Madrid Summit, for example, the leaders of the associate States recognised that China is simply a challenge to Euro-Atlantic security.

We're talking about a global power, a gradually becoming superpower. A very crucial discrimination was made in Madrid. China is simply a challenge for NATO, while Russia is simply a threat. The North Atlantic Alliance should be committed to preventing the emergence of a full economic-military alliance between Russia and China. NATO must so conduct a policy against Beijing that is clearly different from Russia: to show strength, while at the same time seeking points of contact, levels of agreement.

There is besides another large player in Asia, to which attention must be paid. This is India, which is rapidly strengthening their economical and military potential. They distance themselves from China due to the fact that they have historical events, unresolved territorial dispute and competitive ambitions of leadership in the Global South and, in the long term, worldwide. They are besides careful to cooperate with the West, but they participate in the Quad Group, the Four-sided safety Dialogue, whose remaining members are the US, Japan and Australia. NATO could usage it to bond...

However, let us return to European soil. How crucial can the summit in Washington be for Poland itself?

From our point of view, any decision concerning assistance to Ukraine and bringing this country closer to NATO will be important. It would besides be good if the Alliance became more active in defending the borders of Poland and Lithuania with Belarus against hybrid attacks. NATO has not been straight active in this process so far. And it could send multinational subdivisions straight to the Podlasie and Vilnius. However, I do not know if this is simply a real solution right now.

Meanwhile, many large NATO states are fresh after or before the elections. In many places there are shuffles, frequently in a turbulent atmosphere. Could this situation have any effect on the Washington gathering or the functioning of the Alliance in the close future?

The changes you mentioned go in different directions. In France, it means strengthening the far right and different left, but already in the UK - a general shift from right to left. It is so hard to have generalization and far-reaching conclusions. Although, for example, in the United States, the Joe Biden administration is trying to implement a number of solutions that will guarantee continuity in abroad policy, even if Donald Trump returns to power. And yes, any of them will straight influence the Alliance. I mean here. Contact Group on Ukraine, which brings together 50 countries and coordinates assistance to Kiev. So far, the United States has been the head of this body. But shortly NATO will take over as an organization. And change should take place at the Washington summit.

Speaking of the future. Soon, the fresh NATO Secretary will be in charge. How did you answer? Mark Rutte's nomination? How can it affect the functioning of the Alliance?

It's hard to predict. Rutte is an efficient politician who has accumulated considerable experience as Prime Minister of the Netherlands. So far, he has not publically announced his imagination of being in a fresh position, but it is not truly that important. The Secretary-General's influence on the functioning of the Alliance is low. It primarily performs administrative and typical functions. Key decisions are made by the powerful North Atlantic Council, where the leaders of 32 associate States sit at the summits, and between the summits ministers or most frequently ambassadors of these States.

Perhaps if the secretary-general were a typical of 1 of the east flank states, this would have a symbolic dimension. But that did not happen. possibly we'll see it in a fewer or respective years. delight note that Mark Rutte's serious competitor was Klaus Iohannis, president of Romania.

Dr. Grzegorz Kostrzewa-Zorbas is an global safety expert, a postgraduate of Georgetown and Johns Hopkins universities in Washington.