In a surprise twist, the real winner of the summit was Sweden.
Zelenskiy and Ukraine would leave relatively empty handed. They got a re-confirmation of their eventual ascension to membership but without a set timeline or series of required steps.
Nobody expects Ukraine to join whilst they are still at war, but the purposeful vagueness of the summit’s communique clearly was not what Ukraine was hoping for.
Of course, it wasn’t all bad news. Ukraine did get further security commitments and assurances from NATO allies, including the US’s unwavering support. Still, this was less than what Zelenskiy wanted.
NATO, for its part, essentially got what it came for. It was able to portray itself as a united and unwavering ally of Ukraine without actually committing to doing anything new.
So why was Sweden the winner?
For those out of the loop, Sweden – along with its neighbour, Finland – has long maintained a strategic military neutrality. History and geographical location (between the West and Russia) were the main drivers of this position.
However, in the wake of increased Russian aggression, both swung towards the West and declared they wanted to join NATO last year. Whilst Finland’s ascension was straightforward, Sweden’s was held back due to Turkey’s power of veto.
Turkey believed that Sweden was harboring a Kurdish terrorist cell which threatened Turkey’s security. So Turkey blocked Swedish membership until it felt that their grievances were addressed.
The stalemate was not expected to be resolved for some time. Yet, Turkey declared during the summit that it would back Sweden’s bid to join NATO.
There are concessions, of course. Sweden agreed to expand its counter-terrorism initiatives against potential Kurdish cells and to resume selling arms to Turkey.
Regardless, this Turkish U-turn represents an unexpected and welcome result for Sweden. What was expected to take years of negotiating and posturing was swiftly resolved over the course of one summit. Imminent Swedish membership of NATO is now all but guaranteed.
It is perhaps the only substantial change to the current uneasy status quo to emerge from Vilnius. With Ukraine leaving frustrated and the alliance’s commitments broadly unchanged, it is Sweden that exits the summit with the widest grin.
Benjamin Macintyre is a Research Assistant at The New Zealand Initiative. This article was first published HERE
Nobody expects Ukraine to join whilst they are still at war, but the purposeful vagueness of the summit’s communique clearly was not what Ukraine was hoping for.
Of course, it wasn’t all bad news. Ukraine did get further security commitments and assurances from NATO allies, including the US’s unwavering support. Still, this was less than what Zelenskiy wanted.
NATO, for its part, essentially got what it came for. It was able to portray itself as a united and unwavering ally of Ukraine without actually committing to doing anything new.
So why was Sweden the winner?
For those out of the loop, Sweden – along with its neighbour, Finland – has long maintained a strategic military neutrality. History and geographical location (between the West and Russia) were the main drivers of this position.
However, in the wake of increased Russian aggression, both swung towards the West and declared they wanted to join NATO last year. Whilst Finland’s ascension was straightforward, Sweden’s was held back due to Turkey’s power of veto.
Turkey believed that Sweden was harboring a Kurdish terrorist cell which threatened Turkey’s security. So Turkey blocked Swedish membership until it felt that their grievances were addressed.
The stalemate was not expected to be resolved for some time. Yet, Turkey declared during the summit that it would back Sweden’s bid to join NATO.
There are concessions, of course. Sweden agreed to expand its counter-terrorism initiatives against potential Kurdish cells and to resume selling arms to Turkey.
Regardless, this Turkish U-turn represents an unexpected and welcome result for Sweden. What was expected to take years of negotiating and posturing was swiftly resolved over the course of one summit. Imminent Swedish membership of NATO is now all but guaranteed.
It is perhaps the only substantial change to the current uneasy status quo to emerge from Vilnius. With Ukraine leaving frustrated and the alliance’s commitments broadly unchanged, it is Sweden that exits the summit with the widest grin.
Benjamin Macintyre is a Research Assistant at The New Zealand Initiative. This article was first published HERE
1 comment:
Another sucker for the 'interoperability of NATO arms'.. There will be no mixture of arms, NATO can only run efficiently with one type of assault rifle, one HMG, one armoured car, one tank, one type of jet fighter..
It will be Euro designed and manufactured if they're lucky, but I expect the pressure will be intense to "Buy American"- General Dynamic's Abrams tanks, Lockheed's F35 and Colts rifles. No room for Sweden to go is own way with Saab.
Ukraine will be a fine example of how difficult it is to go to war with various systems & try to keep them all prepared and maintained.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.