Volodymyr Zelenskiy had to put a brave face on it, after being petulantly accused of ingratitude by British defence secretary Ben Wallace, but last week’s Nato summit was a disappointment for Ukraine’s president and the embattled country he leads. Nato’s repeated failure to offer an unambiguous timetable for Kyiv’s full membership will be seen by the Kremlin as a weak hedging of bets. It will probably be exploited in any future talks to end the war.
To be sure, Ukraine received pledges of long-term support, more weaponry and G7 assistance, and the halfway house of a Ukraine-Nato council. “We’re not going anywhere. You’re stuck with us,” US president Joe Biden joked. But Zelenskiy’s dutiful laughter seemed a little forced. Sincere though he is, Biden cannot be sure of keeping his promise. In 18 months’ time, US policy under a less supportive Republican successor could be very different.
Like a poor man at a feast, Zelenskiy was instead obliged to witness an orgy of self-congratulation by Nato leaders. The trigger was the apparent decision by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkey’s president, to lift his veto on Nato membership for Sweden which, when last checked, was not being bombarded by Russia. Nato says Stockholm’s accession to the club will enhance the security of all its members. That thought must give Ukrainians a warm feeling inside.
Hailing the Sweden agreement as proof of Nato “unity”, Biden praised Erdoğan effusively, commending him for his “courage, leadership and diplomacy”. Coinciding with Turkey’s release of Ukrainian prisoners placed in its custody by Russia and some unusually amicable exchanges between Erdoğan, the EU and Ankara’s old enemy, Greece, all the talk was of a sudden, pro-western tilt by the notoriously unbiddable Turkish leader.
Sadly, Nato leaders appear to have jumped the gun. Within hours of giving Sweden the thumbs-up, Erdoğan warned its accession would need the approval of Turkish MPs, a possibly lengthy process. Yet parliament is dominated by Erdoğan supporters, so any delays will be at his behest. It became clear, too, that the unspoken quid pro quo is the sale to Turkey of long-coveted US F-16 jets – the same jets that are denied to Ukraine, which actually needs them.
Nato joy was also tempered by the belated realisation that Erdoğan’s unexpected summit geniality did not signal a break with Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, with whom he maintains friendly relations for pragmatic reasons of national and personal self-interest. Turkey has rejected western sanctions on Moscow and boosted bilateral trade since the war began. Turkish exports almost doubled, to around $4.9bn (£3.74bn), in the first half of this year.
Erdoğan said last week he was ready to help Ukraine continue grain shipments through the Black Sea, and Turkey continues to sell drones to Kyiv. Yet at the same time, Russia remains Ankara’s top supplier of natural gas. Putin reportedly deferred billions of dollars in gas payments before May’s presidential election, which Erdoğan won. Around 6 million Russians will visit Turkey this year. One of them is expected to be Putin himself.
Crucially for Erdoğan, superficially improved relations with the west may help him revive Turkey’s ailing, ill-managed economy. Yet given his ongoing double-dealing over Russia, this sort of additional horse-trading does nothing overall to enhance Euro-Atlantic security in tangible ways. Likewise, the leaders’ declaration fiercely condemned Putin’s “illegal war of aggression”, but summiteers offered no new ideas about how to stop it.
That’s disappointing. The world’s most powerful military alliance could and should be more directly and forcefully engaged in defending Ukraine’s people from Russia’s criminal predations. By that urgent measure, the Vilnius summit was a flop.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a letter of up to 250 words to be considered for publication, email it to us at observer.letters@observer.co.uk
