Ceding parts of the occupied territories in exchange for NATO membership and putting an end to the war should be a realistic option for consideration by Kyiv, the chief of staff for the Atlantic alliance’s secretary general suggested at a panel discussion organized by the local daily VG in Norway on Tuesday, August 15th.
For most of the meeting, which focused on the security guarantees for post-War Ukraine, Stian Jenssen merely reiterated official NATO talking points, saying that it’s ultimately up to Kyiv to decide when and on what terms it wishes to begin negotiations.
Then the chief of staff allowed himself a more personal insight, offering a solution that hasn’t been put forward by the alliance’s high command ever before—and likely, won’t ever be, although it is not entirely without merit.
In exchange for reasonably quick NATO membership (as well as avoiding a drawn-out conflict that slowly grinds men and weapons on both sides of the battle line), Jenssen said, perhaps it would be wise to consider ceding territory.
The frontlines are unlikely to significantly change in the short term, he hinted, which must be taken into consideration when talking about peace. “Russia is struggling tremendously militarily, and it seems unrealistic that they can take on new territories,” Jenssen said, adding, “it is rather a question of what Ukraine is able to take back.”
The chief of staff also mentioned that the discussions about Ukraine’s post-war status are already underway and that the possibility of surrendering land has been raised by others as well.
Nonetheless, Jenssen knew he might have crossed a diplomatic line with his public suggestion, and was quick to point out it was not NATO’s official position: “I’m not saying it has to be that way. But that may be a possible solution.”
Regardless of his intention, the remarks immediately cranked up the international media machine, with both Ukraine and Russia, as well as NATO itself, compelled to react as quickly as possible.
As expected, Kyiv wasn’t too receptive to the idea. “Trading territory for a NATO umbrella? It’s ridiculous,” commented Mykhailo Podolyak, one of President Zelensky’s chief advisors, on Twitter. Podolyak went on:
That means deliberately choosing the defeat of democracy, encouraging a global criminal, preserving the Russian regime, destroying international law, and passing the war on to other generations.
If Putin does not suffer a crushing defeat, the political regime in Russia does not change, and war criminals are not punished, the war will definitely return.
Oleg Nikolenko, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry’s spokesman also joined the dispute on Facebook, calling Jenssen’s remarks “absolutely unacceptable.” Nikolenko explained:
The conscious or unconscious participation of NATO officials in shaping the narrative regarding the possibility of Ukraine’s giving up its territories plays into the hands of Russia.
The Russians had their own reservations, but from a completely different perspective. Ukraine giving up the disputed territories “does sound like an interesting idea,” wrote Dmitry Medvedev, a former president, and the deputy head of the Russian Security Council on Telegram.
The only problem is that all their alleged territories are highly disputed. So, in order to enter [NATO], they would have to give up Kiev [sic] itself, the capital of ancient Rus. And the capital would thus have to be moved to Lviv. That is if the Poles agree to leave Lemberg for the coke and lard lovers.
For its part, NATO also spoke out and reassured Ukraine of its unwavering support for territorial integrity, its spokesman stating:
We fully support Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, as NATO leaders reaffirmed at the Vilnius Summit in July. We will continue to support Ukraine as long as necessary, and we are committed to achieving a just and lasting peace.
