NATO Summit: What's the Upshot?

The question of how to deal with Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine was at the heart of the NATO summit that ended on Thursday. Kyiv will receive 40 billion euros in military aid over the next year, including F-16 fighter jets and five air defense systems. Russia was described as the "greatest and most immediate threat", and China as its "decisive accomplice". While Ukraine did not receive a formal invitation to join, its path into NATO is "irreversible", the alliance has stressed. The reactions in the press are mixed.

Friends and foes clearly named

Turkey’s Murat Yetkin Report writes:

“Where previous declarations stated that Russia would be 'closely monitored', it has now been labelled the number one threat. This was inevitable at a summit where solidarity with Ukraine was discussed in a separate session and 40 billion euros in financial and military aid was set aside for the coming year. China was accused of supporting Russia's continuation of the war in Ukraine. ... In addition, there was talk of a rapprochement between Russia and China (including North Korea and Iran), although China was not actually declared a direct enemy, probably due to fears about the situation in the Pacific. Turkey, the strongest country on NATO's southern flank, is right at the center of this constellation.”

Ukraine Unquestionably Part of the West

Ukrainska Pravda stresses the importance of the statement in the final declaration in which Ukraine's path towards NATO is described as "irreversible":

Other Topics of Interest

‘Same Jerk, One of the Same’ – Russians React to Trump’s Victory

Russian social media has reacted with skepticism and frustration to Donald Trump’s election win, particularly towards his promise to end the war in Ukraine quickly.

“It would not be an exaggeration to say that the decision taken in Washington has become another 'point of no return' in Ukraine's integration into NATO. No further proof is needed of Ukraine's determination to become a member of the alliance. ... For many Western partners, however, this was not beyond dispute. In the US, among other countries, many actors believed that Ukraine's membership of the alliance should be used as a bargaining chip in talks with Putin aimed at ending the war. ... Now this approach has been all but ruled out.”

The alliance is going more global

The results of the summit would not simply become invalid in the event of a change of government in Washington, says political analyst Valentin Naumescu on Romania’s Contributors:

“Instead, I believe that the decisions taken, and strategies envisaged now will remain valid in the next term of office of the US president, with perhaps a few additional changes and reservations. With the link that NATO sees to global security, the references to the threats posed by China's expansion or to the strategic alliance between Russia and China, it is possible that even Donald Trump will agree that NATO can become a useful instrument not just for European but also for US strategic interests.”

Not Enough Binding Statements

The decisions taken at the summit don't go far enough, says the Romanian service of Deutsche Welle:

“Romania is completely under a NATO missile defense shield, the Black Sea is monitored by NATO radar and aircraft, but not a word was said about the need for an alliance fleet in this sea, which is once again being monopolized by Moscow. The Republic of Moldova is mentioned in the summit's final declaration but receives no clear assurances, and Ukraine has only been promised money for next year. Nothing is certain in view of the potential major political changes in the NATO states and the emerging divisions.”

The Key Question was Ignored

Weapons alone won't decide the outcome of the war, Finland’s Ilta-Sanomat points out:

“Ukraine has been promised further military aid and is finally getting the F-16 fighter jets it has been waiting for so long. They may boost Ukraine's air defense, but it's clear that a handful of fighter jets and a few pilots with fast-track courses won't win the war or stop Putin. The war will be decided on the frontlines with artillery, ammunition and troops. The side that has enough material and soldiers will win. And that's precisely the question that NATO and its member states don't want to answer: at what point will the West finally conclude that it has no choice but to send its own troops into the war?”

See the original here.