Is Ukraine Safer Outside NATO?

A growing debate surrounds Ukraine's potential membership in NATO, with some experts arguing that it may not be in the country's best interest. Proponents of this view contend that Ukraine would be better off remaining independent, as a formal alliance could inadvertently prolong the ongoing conflict with Russia. The argument posits that crippling Russia is essential for a swift resolution to the war, and that NATO membership could provide the Kremlin with a common enemy, thereby delaying its internal disintegration. Critics of NATO membership assert that the alliance's commitment to Ukraine is not as solid as it appears. They argue that the notion of an "irreversible path" to membership is misleading, as unforeseen events could derail Ukraine's accession. For instance, potential hostilities between NATO and Russian forces could complicate the situation further. Some analysts, like Paul Grod from the Atlantic Council, believe that NATO membership could curb Russian imperial ambitions; however, others argue that it may actually align with Putin's objectives. Frontline military leaders, such as Denys Yaroslavsky, advocate for a different approach, suggesting that Ukraine should focus on building a robust defense system akin to Israel's. This strategy would rely on bilateral treaties with nations that recognize the threat posed by Russia, rather than depending on NATO's collective security framework. Ultimately, the current strategy of coordinated support from the free world is viewed as the most effective means to foster Ukraine's resilience and potentially lead to the disintegration of the Russian Federation.