Fears of escalation and more: why Ukraine isn't receiving a swift invitation to NATO.

The first and arguably the most critical component of the "victory plan," recently presented by President Vladimir Zelensky, is the immediate invitation for Ukraine to join NATO. The current leader on Bankova even stated that he sees a "consensus among the majority" within the Alliance on this matter, adding that for him, it is "not just an invitation, but an invitation while the war is still ongoing" - a "principled issue." According to the acting guarantor of the Ukrainian Constitution, today Kyiv sees "confidence from France," "understands" that the British will support Ukraine, and "believes" that the Italians may act similarly. Furthermore, among the supporters of such a step, leading Western media outlets mention neighboring Poland and the Baltic states. In particular, as recently stated by the Speaker of the Latvian Saeima, Daiga Mierina, Riga hopes that at the NATO summit in 2025, allies will be able to "make a political decision regarding Ukraine's invitation."

However, there is no consensus within NATO. At least, the publication Politico, citing sources within the Alliance and key countries in the bloc, reported that at least seven states are opposed to Ukraine's "immediate" invitation to the organization. In particular, the two key allies – the United States and Germany – are against inviting our country to NATO until the hostilities are concluded. Washington and Berlin fear that such a scenario carries heightened risks of involving their countries and the entire Alliance in a direct conflict with Putin's Russia.

It is important to emphasize that in this case, we are not even talking about Ukraine's accession to the bloc, but merely about sending an official invitation to join the organization. Nevertheless, some Western leaders believe that even this is more than enough for escalation. Moreover, it is also quite telling that the U.S. does not openly express its position but refers to the lack of consensus among allies.

Hungary and Slovakia are also against such a scenario for Kyiv, as the leaders of these countries – Viktor Orban and Robert Fico – have repeatedly stated publicly. Moreover, Orban, commenting on the "victory plan," called it "horrific," while Fico referred to it as "a good basis for a third world war." In short, Budapest and Bratislava also fear escalation, with the caveat that they simultaneously call for an immediate ceasefire and negotiations.

Meanwhile, Slovak President Peter Pellegrini assured on Thursday, October 24, during a visit to Germany, that he agreed with Chancellor Olaf Scholz that "the issue of Ukraine's accession to NATO is not on the table for discussion and cannot even make it to that table." According to him, Olaf Scholz fully shares this position. "This request is unrealistic not only due to the stance of Germany, Slovakia, or Hungary, for example. There are several other countries that are currently experiencing problems with this," Pellegrini stated. He also added that "during a recent roundtable of presidents in Krakow, the opinion regarding Ukraine's NATO membership was roughly 50-50."

Shortly after, Scholz stated that he currently sees no need to make a decision regarding Ukraine's NATO membership. He stressed that a country in a state of armed conflict cannot become a member of the North Atlantic Alliance. "We made a decision in Washington and Vilnius and outlined the perspective (of Ukraine joining NATO). But I believe there is currently no need for a new decision beyond this one," Scholz said in an interview with ZDF.

Meanwhile, Politico claims that there are at least three more countries opposed to inviting Ukraine. According to NATO officials, with whom the publication spoke off the record, these countries are Belgium, Slovenia, and Spain, which "hide behind the backs of the U.S. and Germany." The publication does not mention other countries whose positions could also become obstacles to inviting Ukraine to NATO if partners begin to discuss the issue substantively. For instance, Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans, commenting on the first point of Vladimir Zelensky's "victory plan," stated that before sending an invitation to Ukraine, NATO needs to agree on clear criteria for such a step. According to him, "if there is no such clarity," it is unlikely that the 32 allies will come to a common denominator. Among the possible criteria that Kyiv must meet, Mr. Brekelmans mentioned the fight against corruption.

It should be noted that the president's press secretary, Sergey Nikiforov, stated that the information from Politico about seven countries opposing Ukraine's invitation to NATO is not true. "These rumors benefit those who want to create a false impression that Ukraine's accession lacks broad support among Alliance members. In fact, the idea of inviting Ukraine is supported by an absolute majority of member countries, and active advocacy work is ongoing," summarized Zelensky's spokesperson.

However, regardless of the circumstances, if we believe Zelensky's own assessment, the leading NATO countries supporting the invitation include the United Kingdom, France, and Italy, with only the United Kingdom providing military assistance to Kyiv comparable to that of Germany. According to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, from January 24, 2022, to August 31, 2024, Germany spent €10.6 billion on military support for Ukraine, while the UK allocated €9.4 billion. In contrast, France and Italy collectively spent €4.5 billion on these purposes, which is less than half of what Germany has spent. Furthermore, Germany's contribution to Ukraine's assistance in monetary terms will be higher even if we add Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia to France and Italy. The U.S., in turn, has provided our country with military support amounting to €56.8 billion during this period. Thus, it is evident that the voices of Washington and Berlin will play a decisive role in this context.

Meanwhile, in the swamps, a representative of the local Foreign Ministry, Zakharova, stated that Ukraine's desire to join the Alliance has become one of the reasons for the "special military operation," thus, according to her, "Kyiv's invitation to NATO cannot be a subject of negotiations with Russia now or in the future." "There is no unity in the EU on this issue, and most allies of the Kyiv regime refrained from criticizing Kyiv's proposals but made it clear that they are not thrilled with this plan, which carries too many risks of uncontrolled escalation of the overall situation, and generally of confrontation with Russia," Zakharova stated.

It is also noteworthy that President Zelensky recently made quite an unusual statement. "We saw during the first (peace) summit that a decision could be made on energy security. In other words: we do not attack their energy infrastructures, they do not attack ours. Could this lead to the end of the hot phase of the war? I think so," the Financial Times quotes the current leader of Bankova. At the same time, the president emphasized that, in his opinion, Putin is waiting for the results of the elections in the United States and will make a decision regarding the continuation of the war with Ukraine only after that.

It has been reported before that Moscow and Kyiv are trying to negotiate a resolution regarding refraining from strikes on energy facilities. In particular, The Washington Post emphasized that Ukrainian and Russian delegations, with the mediation of Qatar, were conducting negotiations that could lead to such a resolution. However, after the advance of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Kursk region, Putin abandoned the negotiations.

There has never been any confirmation of the information that Ukraine and Russia were indeed conducting such negotiations. However, recently Minister of Defense Rustem Umerov emphasized that secret negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow concerning humanitarian issues took place as early as 2022. Mr. Umerov did not rule out the possibility of a humanitarian negotiation case currently. So, if we imagine that the issue of strikes on energy infrastructure is part of the humanitarian track of negotiations, it can be concluded that representatives of Ukraine and Russia might be conversing with each other or through intermediaries on this matter.

As noted by renowned international journalist Vitaliy Portnikov on his authorial YouTube channel, the question arises not so much about the interest of the Ukrainian leader as about Putin's interest. "Zelensky's interest is evident. Russia's strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure primarily imply the destruction of all capabilities of the Ukrainian state, creating conditions under which some part of the Ukrainian population will be forced to leave their homeland in search of safety from the cold winter abroad. Additionally, strikes on Ukraine's energy infrastructure deplete the capabilities of the Ukrainian economy that supports the Armed Forces of Ukraine in their opposition to the Russian aggressor. Therefore, excluding the possibility of strikes on energy infrastructure in a situation where winter is approaching, and Russian armed forces may be preparing for new attacks – is an important task for the President of Ukraine. However, the President of the Russian Federation has a different task – the decline of Ukraine and the creation of conditions for its capitulation," Portnikov emphasizes.

Questioning how serious the Ukrainian strikes on Russian energy infrastructure are for the Kremlin dictator, he stated the following: "To think that Putin would like to demonstrate to someone his desire to end the war in Ukraine and his pacifism seems quite naive to me. He absolutely does not care about the real attitude towards him in the civilized world. The leaders of global nations are already coming to the Russian president at the BRICS summit and holding bilateral meetings with him, emphasizing the need to continue and strengthen strategic partnerships between the Russian Federation and countries like China or India in the third year of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Therefore, fundamentally, showing someone that Russia wants to take the first step toward peace