On July 11th and 12th, all NATO members met in Vilnius, Lithuania, to discuss security in the region and the future of their strategic military alliance. Just 20 miles from the Belarusian border, the summit sends a strong signal to Moscow and Minsk that NATO stands firm with Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression. As the long anticipated counteroffensive grinds to a halt, Western leaders reaffirmed their support for Ukraine, which was expressed through security guarantees and pledges to increase military aid. Despite these diplomatic triumphs for Kyiv, President Volodymyr Zelnsky shared his disappointment on the stagnating progress to incorporate Ukraine into NATO. The organization’s ambiguous stance on Ukraine membership is derived from conflicting views between member states. Although the Ukraine war was the focal point of the summit, Sweden’s potential membership and NATO spending were also discussed.

In preparation of the Summit, sixteen NATO members contributed a total of a 1000 troops to safeguard the conference in Vilnius. According to Reuters, France, Germany, Denmark, and Finland contributed fighter jets and air defense systems alongside the troop deployments. Lithuanian President Gitanasn Nauseda told Reuter reporters that even after the summit “we will work with allies to create a rotating force for a permanent air protection”. Furthermore, Lithuania has tripled their deployment of border guards on their borders with Kaliningrad and Belarus. While security is the primary reason for the increased military personnel and equipment, NATO is simultaneously sending a message that the West will not tolerate further encroachments on sovereign land. 

Although Ukraine membership during the war is infeasible, because Article 5 would entail direct military conflict with Russia, Zelensky was hoping for guarantees that Ukraine could join NATO after the war. Members such as Poland and the Baltic states argue that Ukraine has significantly improved its military capabilities over the past decades, thus making its inclusion worthwhile. However, the United States, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom have voiced their concern over the matter, citing that Ukraine’s membership might drag the alliance into an unwanted war in the future. Furthermore, it is unclear whether Ukraine will be able to meet all the conditions required to join NATO due to endemic corruption. 

While NATO has professed support for Ukrainian membership, no substantive path was created to allow for this development. Nevertheless, Kyiv still won substantial military and diplomatic support from the west as a result of the NATO summit. According to the AP, the G7 issued a joint declaration to bolster Ukraine’s defense capabilities over the coming decades. The summit also created the NATO – Ukraine council, which established a body in which NATO and Ukrainian officials can meet to discuss security concerns in the region. 

For a summit that promotes security on the European continent, there was very little discussion on how to bring an end to the war. As Ukraine’s counteroffensive loses traction, it becomes ever more apparent that no one will win this conflict within the near future. Putin has already had his power threatened, highlighted by the initial protests and attempted coup last month. Losing all of the territory in Ukraine would be politically catastrophic for Moscow, meaning the Kremlin will go to great lengths to preserve their territorial gains. Worryingly, the West’s only stated goal is the complete liberation of the country. This leads to a scenario in which each side increases their military capabilities to match their adversaries. Proxy wars often lead to stagnating conflicts with massive destruction and death, as showcased by the Syrian civil war. Furthermore, aiming for the complete annihilation of Putin’s military capabilities could lead to nuclear war. 

For this reason, it is crucial that NATO discusses diplomatic resolutions with Russia, as this is the only path to preserve life and reestablish peace. However, negotiations have been branded as sympathizing with Moscow making this endeavor difficult. According to the Responsible Statecraft, Boris Johnson urged President Zelensky to kill a peace deal on his visit to Kyiv in 2022. This deal would have preserved Russian control over Crimea and the Donbas, ensured that Ukraine does not join NATO, and would have allowed Ukraine to gain security guarantees from a number of countries. If this plan was ratified hundreds of thousands of lives would have been saved. Instead, NATO has sent billions of dollars worth of weapons that have only exacerbated the war. Most recently, the Biden administration approved the supply of cluster munitions to Ukraine, which are banned by treaty in over a 100 countries due to their high rate of civilian casualties. Putin’s war is unjustified and has caused much devastation and despair. However, the war crimes of one country does not excuse a foreign policy that exacerbates conflict. NATO needs to reanalyze their strategy to best end the war and reestablish peace on the European continent.