NATO Could Have Prevented War In Ukraine With One Concession

Why didn’t they grant it?

Grant Piper
5 min readFeb 25, 2022
Photo by Gleb Albovsky on Unsplash

Reneging on agreements made with Ukraine is nothing new. Both Russia and the United States backed off of the strong language agreed upon in the Budapest Memorandum after Ukraine willfully gave up their nuclear weapons program. No one raised much of a fuss after Russia annexed Crimea (despite what the media wants you to believe.) Strong language over Ukraine has been bandied about for decades with little consequence. So why couldn’t NATO have conceded the one thing Vladimir Putin claimed to want?

In my estimation, the current crisis unfolding in Ukraine could have been prevented if NATO simply said that it would not allow Ukraine to join the alliance. They could have even put that promise into writing. They could have ripped up the agreement in the future. God knows no one would be surprised if promises made in Kyiv were later thrown out the window. So why didn’t they?

Trying to deter Russia

The whole philosophy underpinning the NATO alliance in Europe is to counteract Russia. NATO refused to concede Ukraine’s wholly theoretical future entrance into the alliance citing the need for nations to be allowed to choose their strategic partners. That is political speak for we don’t let anyone tell us what to do so

--

--

Grant Piper

Professional writer. Amateur historian. Husband, father, Christian.