NATO meeting; Win-win deal or forced persuasion of Ukraine’
In the first days after World War II and following concerns about the spread of communism in Europe, the United States concluded the North Atlantic Treaty with the alliance of European countries which marked the birth of NATO. The NATO treaty is based on collective security and mutual defense in case of a threat to a member country. For this reason, many countries, such as Sweden, Finland, and especially Ukraine, have not refused any efforts to join NATO.
The important issue is that the identity of any union depends on the existence of a vital and common threat to all its members. In recent years, no event has been able to reproduce the identity of NATO and the strength of the bond between the members of this alliance as much as the war between Russia and Ukraine. The crisis in Ukraine has once again raised Russia as a serious threat to a country that is seeking membership in NATO and now all members of the alliance consider themselves obliged to defend Ukraine. A goal that is more than serving the defense of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians, should be analyzed in line with NATO’s active role-playing and increasing its strategic depth up to the borders of Russia.
In other words, the existing relations between NATO and Ukraine are significantly one-sided. From the beginning of the war until now, Ukraine and its president Volodymyr Zelensky have repeatedly requested military ammunition and the agreement of the members to join NATO, and every time they have been in a situation that many analysts have called “false promises”.
This time, Washington hosted the heads of NATO member states from July 19 to 21 this year to reproduce its nature again in confrontation with Russia.
What happened in the last meeting?
On the 75th anniversary of the founding of NATO, the heads of the 32 member countries of this alliance gathered to discuss and exchange opinions regarding the expansion of military ties between the members and ways to end the crisis in Ukraine. According to the decisions made, the aid of 40 million euros, the granting of F-16 fighters, and the Patriot missile defense systems to Ukraine were put on NATO’s agenda, however, Kyiv’s membership in the North Atlantic Treaty was still not agreed.
In the final statement of this meeting, in addition to Russia, China and Iran were also blamed and some baseless claims were made against these countries. In the final statement, NATO members stated that China was a decisive factor in supporting Russia’s military actions and should end its financial and political support to Russia against Ukraine.
About Iran, the previously rejected views were re-emphasized, and the President of the United States of America, Joe Biden, stated that Russia has accelerated the production of its military ammunition with the help of China, Iran and North Korea. However, Beijing and Tehran rejected these claims and reiterated their neutral and clear positions. China has also called for NATO to withdraw from the Asia-Pacific region, as it believes that the current tensions in the region are due to provocative policies adopted by NATO members.
Iran also states that what is happening in Ukraine is the result of the tension-causing actions of the United States and its European allies, and considers the statements of NATO leaders regarding Tehran’s military assistance to Moscow to be baseless, rejected, and have political goals. But the main question is that according to what was mentioned, is Zelensky satisfied with the results of the meeting?