NATO’s Vilnius summit: what to expect

A dilemma for a summit. If Ukraine is promised fast tracked NATO membership upon conclusion of a peace agreement with Russia – what is the advantage to Russia of making peace?  The issue is high up on NATO’s agenda for the summit to be held in the Lithuanian capital Vilnius on Tuesday and Wednesday.  

NATO committed to eventual Ukrainian membership in 2008 but was vague about a joining date and Kyiv only applied to be a candidate last September. The Baltic States and Poland have been vocal in their support and recently France joined them in calls for the summit to deliver, in President Macron’s words “a path towards membership”. Prime Minister Sunak has yet to go so far but agrees Ukraine’s “rightful place” is in NATO.

The summit host, Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda, said it was important that Kyiv is given the green light in Vilnius about timings, but the US and Germany will probably seek to water down any language about road maps and loose deadlines which might emerge in draft communiques.

The allies recognise they cannot risk fast tracking Ukraine into NATO as that would result in the opposite of the key aim of all of them – to prevent their armed forces being dragged into a direct confrontation with Russia under the alliance’s Article 5. However, Washington recognises that Kyiv needs more than vague promises and so will try to broker a compromise statement which gives Ukraine immediate long term NATO security guarantees but without a clear roadmap to membership.

In theory this would reassure Kyiv that it will not be abandoned, but also allow Moscow to eventually come to the negotiating table without having to concede that one of its key war aims, preventing Ukrainian NATO membership, had failed. President Biden is aware that if the current Ukrainian counter offensive is deemed to have failed then the ongoing massive military and financial support the US gives Kyiv will grow as an issue a year out from the presidential election.

The other main item on the agenda is Sweden’s accession to the alliance. With Finland already admitted, Swedish membership would hugely boost NATO’s northern flank especially in the Baltic and the Arctic. However, accession requires unanimous agreement from all 31 existing members and Turkey and Hungary are objecting. If Ankara agrees, Budapest will agree, but Ankara won’t yet agree.

Turkey’s President Erdogan is using the issue to achieve some domestic political goals. He has two demands. Firstly, Sweden must stop giving shelter to members and fundraisers of groups Turkey describes as terrorists – eg the Kurdish PKK and its Syrian version the YPG. Secondly, the Swedish government must do more to combat Islamophobia.

Stockholm has jumped through hoops to meet Ankara halfway. To no avail. It amended the Swedish Constitution, it hardened counterterrorism laws, and it agreed to extradite a small number of people wanted by the Turkish authorities. The public burning of a Koran in Sweden by an Iraqi man last week has not helped despite the fact that it was Swedish judges who decided the event could go ahead and not the government. That might be a detail lost on a Turkish president who controls the Turkish judiciary.  

An added complication is that the U.S. Congress want Turkey to approve and ratify Swedish membership before it will approve the $20 billion sale of American F-16 fighter jets to Ankara, a position Turkey says is unacceptable. NATO wants the issue settled in time to welcome Sweden into the family on Tuesday. On Thursday of this week, a meeting to advance the process ended without a breakthrough although there were hints of progress.  There will be another meeting on Monday in Vilnius between NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, President Erdogan, and Swedish Prime Minister, Ulf Kristersson. 

There are a few sweeteners which could be thrown into the pot over the weekend. For example, Erdogan has not been invited to the White House despite Biden living there for three years. If we see a Turkish approval on Monday, followed a few weeks later by an invitation, we can draw conclusions. At the moment though, there is still deadlock and unless it is broken NATO will be denied a summit welcome party for a new member.

Down the agenda, but important, is the official third extension of Stoltenberg’s tenure as Secretary-General. He is regarded as among the most capable of political leaders the organization has had which is why the difficult decision of a replacement has again been able to be kicked down the road. Britain’s Defence Secretary Ben Wallace was considered a leading candidate, but media reports this week suggest Biden blocked him after he helped form the coalition of countries lobbying for Ukraine to be given F-16 jets without American approval. It’s thought Biden wants EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to get the role when she stands down from her current position next year. She is a former German defence minister where her term in office was widely thought to have overseen a catalogue of both errors and inaction.

An interesting side bar to the main event is that the heads of government from Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand have been invited to the summit, a move which underlines NATO’s increasing involvement in the Indo-Pacific amid concern about China’s perceived aggressive role in the region.

That concern will play a major part in future NATO summits, but this year the headlines will be made by the decisions on Ukraine and Sweden.

Write to us with your comments to be considered for publication at letters@reaction.life