Abstract
This chapter critically examines the unfolding dynamics of NATO's eastern flank in the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine (2022-present). It underscores the paramount importance of NATO's defensive role and rigorously investigates the organization's robust response to the aggression, specifically in the proactive extension of both informal and formal support to Ukraine. The study delves into the geoeconomic considerations influencing the conflict, examining the impact on global geopolitics, economic trends, and the divergence of policies within NATO. Furthermore, the chapter introduces hypotheses, proposing a fundamental shift in the global economic relations. It discusses the role of democratic peace theory and the limitations of Putin's objectives in Ukraine and suggests the unlikelihood of a nuclear escalation in this conflict even if it worsens. The research underscores the complexity of decision-making amid geopolitical and geoeconomic intricacies, emphasizing the need for nuanced analysis beyond the battlefield.
“Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril. When you are ignorant of the enemy, but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal. If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain in every battle to be in peril.”― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
TopIntroduction
This chapter argues that the Russian war in Ukraine serves as a reminder of the paramount importance of NATO's existence to both its member states and aspiring candidates who wish to join the alliance. It suggests that NATO functions not as an offensive but rather as a defensive military organization. Characterized by conservatism and pragmatism in the admission of new members, the organization can demonstrate far-reaching generosity when it serves its interests, partly extending its security umbrella to important neighboring countries vulnerable to the neo-imperialist policies of the Russian Federation under the administration of Vladimir Putin. However, this chapter does not aim to portray a conciliatory narrative or a politically sanitized depiction of the situation in Ukraine. On the contrary, it aspires to make a substantive contribution to the ongoing discourse concerning the future of NATO’s eastern flank amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (2022-present).
This contribution is grounded in an examination of various geoeconomic considerations that encompass fundamentally distinct geopolitical doctrines. The analysis applies these doctrines to the deliberation on NATO’s response to the conflict in Ukraine. Notable among these perspectives are those with a strong pro-Ukrainian orientation, such as the Giedroyc-Mieroszewski doctrine (Pietrzak, 2023a) and the Brzezinski doctrine (Pietrzak, 2023b). Conversely, there are perspectives that are overtly ambivalent but suggest Ukraine’s unimportance, exemplified by the rather static and conservative Mearsheimer doctrine (Mearsheimer, 2002). Additionally, there are viewpoints advocating nuanced and far-reaching restraint in approaching hawkish expectations for the resolution of the conflict, as evidenced in the conciliatory and territorial concessions-based Kissinger peace plan. This plan is a replica of similarly successful and similarly unpopular plans implemented in the Middle East after the Yom Kippur War of 1973 and in Cyprus after 1974. However, before his death, even Kissinger wondered whether such a plan could have practical application in Ukraine, given that Putin has proven to be completely unpredictable. Instead, he clearly stated that Ukraine should be allowed to join NATO (Radio Free Europe, 2023; Gold, 2023; Tyshchenko, 2023; France 24, 2023; TASS, 2023; The Economist, 2023).
This chapter aims to impartially present the pros and cons of carefully selected policy suggestions. Furthermore, in the final section of this chapter, we will contemplate whether Ukraine has a viable chance of becoming a member of the EU and NATO. If so, we will endeavor to establish when such an outcome might be plausible and identify the main obstacles that Ukraine would need to overcome to achieve this objective. To address these questions, this chapter will scrutinize the validity of the following eight hypotheses:
Key Terms in this Chapter
The Jaishankar Doctrine: This suggests that under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India is reclaiming its rightful place among today's global leaders. Jaishankar advocates collaboration with the West, Russia, and China on an equal basis. In 2022, he famously declared that India should continue purchasing Russian fossil fuels if they are more affordable, emphasizing this as beneficial for the Indian people. Jaishankar sees no moral issue with such transactions, highlighting that Europe cannot expect support on moral grounds while disregarding the rest of the world, especially considering the 2020 China-India border exchange that went unnoticed by the West. As he points out regarding Russian oil, what India buys in a month, the EU purchases in a single afternoon.
The Giedroyc-Mieroszewski Doctrine: This doctrine highlights the structural importance of an independent Ukraine, explicitly suggesting that, from the Polish and Central European perspective, an independent Ukraine is crucial to realizing the dream of an independent and peaceful Europe. As an independent country, Ukraine's borders should be protected (Source: Pietrzak, 2023a ).
The Revised Kissinger Doctrine: A doctrine announced at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2023 pragmatically suggests that a neutral Ukraine is no longer meaningful or viable; therefore, the only way to end the war in Ukraine is to offer it full NATO membership.
IR Theory: International Relations (IR) theory refers to a field of study that seeks to understand the interactions between states, as well as non-state actors, in the international system. It provides frameworks and concepts to analyze and interpret the complex dynamics of international politics. IR theory explores questions related to the behavior of states, the causes of conflict and cooperation, the role of international institutions, and the impact of globalization, among other topics (McGlinchey & Gold, 2021 AU120: The in-text citation "McGlinchey & Gold, 2021" is not in the reference list. Please correct the citation, add the reference to the list, or delete the citation. ). In this chapter IR theory is treated as a scientific ontology - a great reservoir and a compartmentalization of studies, methods, and theories that will be supplemented by selected philosophical ontologies.
IR Approach: In this context, one of the schools of thought in IR theory, such as realism, liberalism, constructivism, Marxism, feminism, postcolonialism, poststructuralism, or the English school (Source: Pietrzak 2021 )
Davutoglu’s “Zero Problems with Neighbors”: This is a robust articulation of the geostrategic policies described in Ahmet Davutoglu’s Strategic Depth, in which he advocates amiable relations with all of Turkey’s neighbors, but his tenure as the country’s foreign policy minister saw a number of failures in implementing these policies primarily due to the adoption of the Erdogan’s hawkish policy of neo-Ottomanism and the religions indoctrination of Turkish society.
The Mearsheimer Doctrine: This suggests for NATO a far-reaching restraint as far as Ukraine is concerned to avoid any escalations, for, in the end, the Ukraine war of 2022 and the previous annexation of Crimea in 2014 happened because of Western promises made to this country (Source: Pietrzak 2024 AU121: The citation "Pietrzak 2024" matches multiple references. Please add letters (e.g. "Smith 2000a"), or additional authors to the citation, to uniquely match references and citations. ).
The Brzezinski Doctrine: This recommends avoiding direct involvement in an open-ended conflict with Russia on behalf of Ukraine. Instead, it advocates more comprehensive support for Ukraine and other countries in the so-called Rimland, the region surrounding the Heartland (Russia and China). In this context, Brzezinski’s work proposes expediting covert efforts across various domains—military, political, logistical, diplomatic, humanitarian, and material—against enemies. All these efforts are aimed at supporting these countries on their transatlantic route because only such an outcome can truly bring peace and stability to Eastern Europe, the Balkans, the Caucasus, and the rest of the world (Inspired by: Pietrzak, 2024b ; Pietrzak, 2023b ).