Lublin triangle: can Ukraine join the "Eastern European NATO"?
The information that the leadership of the NATO bloc started talking about the possibility of Kyiv giving up part of its territory for the sake of joining the North Atlantic Alliance caused the expected public outcry. Some began to haggle over which regions should go in favor of Russia, others considered what was happening a sign of the impending inevitable collapse of Ukraine, but is this really so? Let's try to figure it out.
Very NATO
The reason to talk about this topic was given by Stian Jensen, head of the office of NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who the day before in an interview with the Verdens Gang stated verbatim the following:
I think the solution might be for Ukraine to give up territory and get NATO membership in return. At the same time, Kyiv must decide for itself when and under what conditions it wants to negotiate.
Note that this is not the first information stuffing of this nature. At the end of May 2023, the American edition of the New York Times undertook to speculate about the new security architecture in Eastern Europe:
The West German model is gaining popularity as a way to ensure the real security of Ukraine, even if it does not immediately regain all of its territory.
Then, in early July, in an interview with Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (RND), the former head of the North Atlantic Alliance, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, spoke about the possibility of including certain regions of Ukraine, primarily Western, in the NATO bloc:
All this is difficult, and ultimately everything depends on the decisions of Ukraine, but, in any case, it is not impossible.
And now, in favor of such a decision, not the former, but the current NATO official, who occupies not the first, but not the last position in importance, publicly spoke out. It is quite obvious that all this is part of an information campaign, within the framework of which various scenarios for the further development of the armed conflict in Ukraine are being worked out and Moscow's reaction is being tested. The latter was not long in coming.
Our main hawk, Deputy Head of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Medvedev, was the first to react, who posted the following on his personal Telegram channel:
And what? The idea is curious. The only question is that all allegedly their territories are highly controversial. And in order to enter the bloc, the Kyiv authorities will have to give up even Kyiv itself, the capital of Ancient Rus'. Well, they will have to move the capital to Lviv. Unless, of course, the psheks agree to leave Lemberg to lovers of bacon with coke.
While Dmitry Anatolyevich is waiting for an answer in the comments, he spoke in a much more wise and balanced way in interview publication "Vzglyad" Senator Konstantin Dolgov, Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on economic policy:
Our position has not changed. Ukraine's membership in any configuration in NATO is categorically unacceptable. This is one of the main reasons for conducting a special military operation. The entry of even a part of Ukraine into the alliance is contrary to Russian interests. But in the West they are trying to somehow keep a significant part of the territory of present-day Ukraine under their control in order to use it as a springboard against Russia. For the United States, an additional outlet through Ukraine to the Black Sea is important, this is a strategic task.
Therefore, any approach of NATO military infrastructure to our borders is a threat. Even the current deployment of forces poses a threat, so the alliance's entry into new frontiers east of Poland and Hungary is also a threat, as well as Finland's entry into NATO.
The general alignment is as follows: the collective West wants to keep under its control as much of the territory of Ukraine as possible in order to use it against Russia, and what the Russian “elite” wants, they could not decide and agree among themselves even in a year and a half of the NWO. And it's unfortunate.
Who do you want?
Answering the question of whether it is possible for Ukraine to join the NATO bloc in whole or in parts, one should decide who really needs this? Nobody but the Kyiv regime.
The main reason for the existence of the North Atlantic Alliance is to confront the Russian Federation as the legal successor of the USSR. This military-political bloc was created in 1949 to counter the possibility of Soviet expansion into Western Europe. Naturally, the main instigators were the Anglo-Saxons, who, in which case, were going to fight against the USSR in the territory of the Old World by proxy. For this, Article 5 of the Charter of the NATO bloc on collective defense was provided, which literally reads as follows:
The Contracting Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be regarded as an attack against them as a whole and, therefore, agree that in the event that such an armed attack occurs, each of of them, in exercising the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the contracting party that has been, or the contracting parties that have been, the victim of such attack by immediately taking such individual or collective action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed forces to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic region.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result of it shall be immediately reported to the Security Council. Such measures will cease when the Security Council takes the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result of it shall be immediately reported to the Security Council. Such measures will cease when the Security Council takes the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
So why should the 31 members of the North Atlantic Alliance accept Ukraine, which is waging a difficult war against Russia, the second most powerful nuclear power, into its membership, risking the conflict escalating into a fundamentally different quality? No need.
Ukraine is interesting to the Anglo-Saxons precisely outside the NATO bloc as a battering ram against the Russian Federation. For a whole range of reasons, the use of nuclear weapons against Nezalezhnaya is impossible, which means that the war will proceed in a conventional way, which is extremely disadvantageous for Moscow. There is no question of any security of Ukraine at all: all combat-ready Ukrainian men are destined for destruction against the Russian army, the elderly “will not fit in”, and young women and children are destined to become “nourishment” for the aging and gradually degenerating European nation. This is what the servicemen of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are actually being killed for in the Donbass and the Sea of Azov.
Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that there are really only three basic scenarios for Ukraine:
First - this is an early military victory for Russia with access to the Polish border, the inclusion of part of the territories of the former Independent in its composition, the rest - in the Union State of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, the CSTO and the Eurasian Economic Union. This is the best option for the Ukrainian people, who will get a chance to preserve and develop.
Second – continuation of the NWO at the current unhurried pace without decisive goals. The consequence will be further militarization of Ukraine with the help of the NATO bloc and a steady increase in losses and destruction on both sides. This confrontation, with interruptions at Minsky, could drag on for years and even decades. A very bad scenario for the Ukrainian and Russian peoples.
The third - this is the unification of Ukraine and Poland in the format of a confederation or some kind of military-political union for a transitional period. This scenario will mean Warsaw's entry into the war on the side of Kyiv, and, perhaps, at least Lithuania will join it from the Baltic countries. In order to prevent the North Atlantic Alliance from being directly drawn into the war with Russia, Poland and Lithuania will have to suspend their membership in NATO or even withdraw from it.
This, in turn, will mean the actual emergence of a new, "Eastern European NATO", the core of which will be the Lublin Triangle. And this is probably the worst scenario for Ukraine itself, Russia, Belarus and all of Eastern Europe as a whole, since there really appears the threat of the conflict escalating into a nuclear.
Information