Ukraine wants to join NATO — here’s why that’s such a dangerous prospect  

Ukraine’s ambassador to NATO recently expressed that the Ukrainian government would like a formal invitation to join the alliance before President Biden leaves office in January.  

Make no mistake, admitting Ukraine into NATO right now would mean direct war between the United States and Russia.  

Admitting Ukraine into NATO could recklessly risk American blood and treasure while serving to escalate the existing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Article 5 of the NATO treaty contains a collective defense stipulating that an attack on one member is an attack on all members. Russian President Vladimir Putin has also repeatedly expressed that Ukraine’s entry into NATO is a “red line.”   

It’s important to remember that NATO is a military alliance, not a social club. Ukraine also has to bring something to the table for the collective security of the alliance in order for their membership into the alliance to benefit other members. It is unclear what bringing Ukraine into the fold would do to bolster U.S. national security or the security of NATO allies, especially while the country is at war with a nuclear superpower. 

Adding Ukraine to NATO has no clear benefit for the average American taxpayer, since the move would likely mean pouring even more U.S. funds into Ukraine. Just last week, the White House approved an additional $425 million for Ukraine. In total, the Biden administration has provided approximately $59.1 billion in security assistance since Russia invaded in February 2022. Despite the cash infusion, it’s unclear what the future holds for Ukraine, as the government has not outlined a realistic strategy to end the war. 

In order for Ukraine to be admitted into NATO, the U.S. Senate must approve the country’s membership. It was a heavy lift to approve a supplemental for Ukraine earlier this year, and it’s unclear if another Congress would even vote on admitting Ukraine into NATO. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a powerful proponent of previous supplementals for Ukraine, will be stepping down from his influential post at the end of the year. Poised to replace him in the position are a handful of Republicans who seem skeptical of pumping billions more dollars into Ukraine. 

Additionally, with the 2024 election on the horizon, it’s possible that the makeup of Congress next year may be vastly different than it is today. If Republicans gain control of the Senate, a GOP leader skeptical of Ukraine’s membership in NATO could simply refuse to schedule a vote that would pave the way for Ukraine’s membership in NATO, just as McConnell did in 2016 when he refused to schedule a vote on Merrick Garland’s nomination to be a Supreme Court justice. 

Granting Ukraine NATO membership requires a treaty, and treaties are different from regular legislative business. While normal bills need to be re-introduced each Congress, a treaty can be introduced in one Congress and approved by another. Biden could theoretically start the treaty process of adding Ukraine into NATO, and today’s Congress or a future Congress could vote on it, even if he is no longer in office. The Senate can also vote on a treaty to approve Ukraine’s membership into NATO in the next few weeks, even if it may take many additional years for the country to be approved in the alliance. Essentially, the vote would still be legally binding, even if the elected leaders are no longer in office when the treaty comes into force. 

This is extremely dangerous, because the elected officials of today could essentially vote to start war with Russia on the backs of their lost elections.  

While Congress is out of session now, members will come back after the election to finish legislative business for the year. Some members will be lame ducks, meaning that these members may be apt to vote to approve Ukraine’s membership into NATO because they will feel less beholden to their constituents and more beholden to special interests that hold the key to their next jobs. There is also a greater emphasis for members to create a “legacy” in their final days in office, and members are more likely to push for landmark legislation to cement that “legacy” before their time is up. 

Perhaps the reason why the Ukrainian government wants an invitation into the alliance from President Biden right now is because they are aware of these dynamics and want the Senate to act hastily to approve the country’s membership in the alliance before the next Congress is sworn in. 

But that doesn’t disregard the other problems that Ukraine may face entering the alliance. Although NATO has dropped the requirement that Ukraine submit a Membership Action Plan, once a stumbling block for the country’s entry, all members of the alliance must agree on adding Ukraine into NATO. Finland and Sweden were recently admitted into NATO, but only after lengthy negotiations with countries like Turkey and Hungary. 

Adding Ukraine into NATO at this time would be a dangerous precedent to set. We can only hope that the conflict will end in negotiations and that the U.S. will not face the prospect of war with Russia. 

Demri Scott Greggo is a contributing fellow at Defense Priorities.