Nato summit exposes divisions over Ukraine membership

Huge implications no matter the war's outcome 

The ultimate outcome of the conflict, furthermore, will have profound implications for Nato whichever side wins.

If Ukraine succeeds in defeating its much larger and better-equipped neighbour, the victory would send a clear message to Moscow that any similar act of aggression against a European state is doomed to fail, which should persuade the Kremlin to alter its hostile stance.

If, on the other hand, Russia prevails on the Ukrainian battlefield, Putin will be able to conclude that, for all the sacrifices involved, his dream of rebuilding the Russian Empire and re-establishing Russia as a dominant power, remains on track.

It is no understatement, therefore, to say that the future of European security rests on the ultimate outcome of the Ukraine conflict, which is why the vexed issue of whether Ukraine should be allowed full membership of Nato has become the alliance's most pressing issue, with different member states arguing in favour of different outcomes.

On one side there is a powerful alliance of countries, including Britain, Poland and the Baltic states, that believe Kyiv should be rewarded for its brave resistance against Russian aggression by eventually joining the alliance.

But his proposition has run into stiff opposition from the US, Germany and France. Washington believes that Ukraine needs to implement significant reforms of its political and judicial systems before it can be considered for Nato membership.

On their part, Germany and France worry that allowing Kyiv membership could further provoke Russia, as it would appear to justify Putin's claims that Nato's ultimate objective is to threaten the security of the Russian homeland by extending its defensive posture further east.

Fear over all-out war between Russia and the West

Another vital factor that rules out any immediate prospect of Ukraine joining the alliance is that, were Ukraine to become a fully-fledged Nato member while the Ukraine conflict was still in process, under article five of the Nato charter, the rest of the alliance would be committed to defending Ukraine's territorial integrity, thereby raising the prospect of all-out war between Russia and the West.

Clearly, all of the Nato leaders meeting in Vilniuare desperate to avoid such an outcome, which is why any offer made to Kyiv about its future ties with Nato will fall short of offering full membership.

Washington — which remains the largest military and financial contributor to the alliance — made its position clear at the weekend when US President Joe Biden said he did not believe Ukraine was "ready for membership in Nato", pointing out that there was no unanimity within the alliance "about whether or not to bring Ukraine into the Nato family now, at this moment, in the middle of the war."

There have also been suggestions that opposition in the White House to Ukraine joining Nato is based on the Biden administration's hopes of eventually negotiating a deal with Moscow to end the fighting.

US officials have continued to maintain discrete contacts with the Kremlin since the fighting erupted in February last year, and it was reported last week that a senior delegation of former senior US officials with close ties to the Biden administration met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in New York in April to lay the groundwork for negotiations to end the war in Ukraine.

Such a prospect is unlikely so long as Ukraine's current military counter-offensive to liberate Ukrainian territory from Russian control continues to gain ground, and Zelensky insists his ultimate goal is to liberate all Ukrainian territory from Russian occupation — including Crimea.

As a consequence, Nato leaders will remain divided over how best to deal with the problematic issue of Ukraine's membership in the alliance, offering a number of stop-gap measures, such as providing Kyiv with a number of "security guarantees", until the war in Ukraine is finally over.