Ukraine is on an irreversible path to NATO membership,
affirmed by its outgoing Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the
three day summit in Washington DC.
The NATO members, who are favouring a faster membership trap
for Ukraine,
included the word irreversible in the joint declaration to demonstrate
that Kiev has moved closer to entry into the alliances
last years summit.
Speaking to reporters, Stoltenberg outlined the alliances plans to aid
Ukraine in the year ahead.
We will support Ukraine by planning and coordinating donations
and will manage the transfer and repair of equipment.
We will also provide support to the long term development
of
Ukraine's armed forces. This will not make NATO party to
the conflict,
but it will help Ukraine to uphold its rights to
self defence.
NATO pledged a $43 billion worth of military aid to
Ukraine in
2025.
Read that €40 billion is a minimum baseline within the
next year
and to ensure sustainable funding for Ukraine to prevail,
we also agreed to review this at our summit in
2025, not least to ensure it continues to meet
Ukraine's needs.
We are not doing this because we want to prolong
a war,
we are doing this because we want to end the
war as soon as possible.
In a big boost for Ukraine,
United States, Netherlands and Denmark announced that the first NATO
provided F Sixteens were on their way to Kiev and
would be flying this summer following months of preparations.
During the summit, NATO gave a stern warning to China
over its alleged assistance to Russia in the war against
Ukraine.
In a joint declaration, the 32 member military alliance squarely
blamed Beijing for fueling Moscow's aggression against Kiev.
Now the joint declaration read and I'm quoting here.
We call on the PRC as a permanent member of
the United Nations Security Council with a particular responsibility to
uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter
to seize all material and political support to Russias war
effort.
In response, China warned NATO against provoking confrontation and rivalry.
A spokesperson for Beijing mission to the European Union said
that the military alliance should stop hyping up the so-called
China threat.
He said, And I'm quoting here,
it is known to all that China is not the
creator of the Ukraine crisis.
Chinas position on Ukraine is open and above board.
Meanwhile, another familiar yet unpredictable challenge lies ahead of NATO,
the possibility of another US administration led by Donald Trump.
The Republican partys nominee has consistently sent mixed signals about
his commitment to collective defence.
NATO members are seen as wanting to Trump proof military
aid for Ukraine ahead of Trump's possible reelection.
For more on this, we are now being joined by
Mr.
Yuakim Bittelek, who is a foreign policy expert and he's
joining us live for Normandy in France.
So my first question to you,
Kiev has, of course moved closer to entry into the
NATO alliance and Ukraines NATO bid is sure to antagonize
Russia even further.
So do you feel that NATO is not really taking
any peace plan into cognizance with a step like this?
Well, peace plans depends, depend always on two sides.
And I think what no one has reported about this
summit,
Viktor Orban, the Hungarian Prime Minister,
who is normally near nearer to Moscow
to than many others in Europe,
has gone to Moscow. He has gone to Kiev first,
then to Moscow, then to Beijing.
And he has agreed with his declaration of
the of the NATO summit.
And this is for me one of the interesting facts.
Russia has, through its aggression to the Ukraine,
reached something that no one expected anymore in Europe.
First of all, the war in Europe,
within Europe. And 2nd, a united front against any aggressor
in Europe.
And this is first of all against Russia and you
feel like back in the
1970s, nineteen 80s in in the Cold War.
And on the other hand,
please, the Chinese took, should,
let's say, take note of a fact that the Europeans
see exactly that China is not neutral
in this war and does not seem to be interested
in helping hands of other NATO members to stop this
war.
NATO would like to see the stop of this war
tomorrow.
Many, many countries, even my compatriots in Germany or in
France would like to see as an immediate stop.
But what at what price
the price is? Would you
abandoned, let's say, a part of your territory?
Would India be ready to
abandon a part of its own classical territory
which which has been always,
let's say part of the former Soviet Ukrainian Republic in
the past,
the East,
which would allow this? And therefore
the Russians can't say only well,
because we are ready, but only under our conditions.
The aggressor is defining the conditions or the aggressed nation
is defining its conditions.
Where is the real problem?
And what NATO is doing today is just reinforcing
by many means the Ukrainian air defence.
When you look at the bombs of last weeks
against the Children's Hospital, etcetera,
well, police visa, crimes of war,
even the United Nations had to acknowledge this
and therefore NATO is doing well.
It's best to help the Ukrainians to defend themselves.
It's not a war against Russia beyond Ukrainian borders,
not at all. It's a war of the Russians against
the Ukraine.
And we are a bit confusing
when you look at international media,
who is the aggressor, who is the aggressor nation?
Therefore, it's a clear signal of the summit
against Russia and Russia should
be ready to finally to talk it to begin real
peace negotiations,
not under a dictator or not as a dictator,
if you want.
So strong words coming from you.
While you say that NATO would want a stop to
this war tomorrow if it could,
but there has been so much discussion about the ongoing
war within the NATO bloc
and of course, sending more weapons to Ukraine.
There are lives being lost still,
even if NATO would want an end to this war
tomorrow.
But do you, however, feel that the NATO bloc has
given due consideration to the various peace plans really and
the proposals by different stakeholders?
I think so. Yes,
NATO has done. They have been testing different solutions,
different peace prospects. But there is only one answer from
Moscow.
The answer from Moscow is
please, you have to give us what we have conquered
in the last two years.
It's the eastern Ukraine. And finally it's the Crimea.
I think on the Crimea,
the Ukrainians would have been ready to talk about a
specific
intermediate solution for the next
2025 years, no problem. But you can't expect from the
Ukraine to give back or to give
over to Russia something which was Ukrainian before.
And therefore what NATO partners are doing,
its defending the territorial integrity of Ukraine,
full stop. Or more or less.
There is not, let's say declared war against for Russia,
against Russia, no. So very quickly,
with Key moving a step closer to the membership,
what do you view as the road ahead from here
on?
Well,
this is for me, it's a critical question.
It's clear. NATO has said for a moment
NATO membership only once the war is over.
And I think this is
the clear line of the big majority of heads of
state and of government of a NATO member.
It's clear only after any war.
Yes, not during the war and not now.
OK, Thank you so much Yakim Bittelik for joining us
with your insights on that.
For all the latest news,
download the We On app and subscribe to our YouTube
channel.