It is a geographical fact: Ukraine is not only far from the North Atlantic, it is separated by two seas and an entire continent.
Ukraine lies on the Eastern edge of Europe, bordered by the Black Sea to the south and the Sea of Azov to the southeast. The North Atlantic, on the other hand, is far to the west, beyond the vast expanse of all of Europe. Ukraine is nowhere near the Baltic Sea, which lies far to the northwest. Beyond the Baltic, the North Sea also stands between Ukraine and the distant North Atlantic Ocean.
This substantial distance from the North Atlantic raises questions about the appropriateness of Ukraine’s relationship with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Originally founded in 1949 as a collective defense mechanism against the Soviet Union, NATO’s strategic purpose was rooted in the geopolitics of the Cold War. However, the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the subsequent geopolitical shifts have significantly altered the global landscape.
As NATO has expanded eastward, incorporating countries that were once part of the Soviet bloc, it has sparked considerable tension with Russia. For Russia, NATO’s eastward expansion is perceived not just as a relic of Cold War antagonism but as a direct and provocative encroachment on its sphere of influence. The inclusion of countries far removed from the North Atlantic, such as Ukraine, into discussions about NATO membership only exacerbates these tensions.
From a geographical and strategic standpoint, Ukraine’s candidacy for NATO membership is puzzling. Ukraine’s security concerns and political aspirations are legitimate, but its alignment with an alliance centered around the North Atlantic region seems incongruous. This misalignment prompts a broader reflection on whether NATO has outlived its original mandate and relevance. The organization was created to address a very specific set of threats in a particular geopolitical context that has dramatically evolved over the past seven decades.
Crimean Citizenship
The residents of the Crimean Peninsula have experienced a complex and tumultuous history, often finding themselves under the control of different countries and regimes within relatively short spans of time:
- Ottoman Empire (1475-1774): Crimea was under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire for several centuries.
- Russian Empire (1783-1917): Catherine the Great annexed Crimea, making it part of the Russian Empire.
- Soviet Union (1922-1991): Following the Russian Revolution and the formation of the USSR, Crimea became part of the Soviet Union. Initially, it was part of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and later transferred to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1954.
- Ukraine (1991-2014): With the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Crimea became part of the newly independent Ukraine.
- Russian Federation (2014-present): In 2014, Crimea was annexed by Russia following a controversial referendum, a move that has been widely condemned by the international community and is not recognized by Ukraine or most of the West.
Need For NATO?
Moreover, NATO’s continued existence and expansion appear increasingly provocative to Russia, a major global power, who is Ukraine’s direct neighbor, and also the direct neighbor to the United States. This provocation is seen by many as a source of unnecessary friction, raising the specter of conflict in a region that has experienced significant turmoil.
The question then arises: Is NATO’s current strategy serving the cause of peace and stability, or is it inadvertently fostering division and hostility in the form of Binary Conflict?
Analogy
In terms of GDP and other variables, Ukraine is to Russia as Cuba is to the United States.
Imagine if all of South and Central America provided military aid to Cuba to help reclaim Guantanamo Bay from the United States. This would be a highly provocative move, similar to how NATO’s support for Ukraine is perceived by Russia. The United States, with its significant strategic and historical investment in Guantanamo Bay, would likely not simply concede its usage of the bay. This situation would be exacerbated if all US naval vessels there were scuttled, raising the stakes significantly.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Ukraine’s significant geographical distance from the North Atlantic and its proximity to Russia underscore the need for a reassessment of NATO’s strategic objectives and relevance.
The alliance’s original purpose as a defensive pact against Soviet aggression no longer aligns neatly with today’s complex and multipolar world.
As the global community seeks to navigate these complexities, it may be time to consider whether NATO, in its current form, continues to serve the best interests of global security and stability.
NPTO
Be ready to join the North Pacific Treaty Organization, which should include the US, Russia, China, Canada, Japan, the Koreas, and the Philippines.
