The NATO Endgame: Why European Union Membership Is Not Enough for Ukraine
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 มิ.ย. 2024
- Check out my book "What Caused the Russia-Ukraine War": amzn.to/3HY5aqW. You can also read it for free by signing up for a Kindle Unlimited trial at amzn.to/3QMsBr8. (I use affiliate links, meaning I earn a commission when you make a transaction through them at no cost to you. Even if you read for free, you are still supporting the channel.)
As a rapid entry into NATO becomes less feasible for Ukraine, many analysts have turned toward thinking of the European Union as a quality alternative. Like NATO, the EU has a collective security provision that Kyiv could invoke to solicit help from other member states. However, this video explains why Ukraine does not see EU membership as being sufficient, and why NATO remains the endgame. Still, the EU will be a helpful intermediary step to reach that goal.
0:00 EU versus NATO Membership
1:18 Barriers to Ukraine's Entry into NATO
4:40 Is the EU Easier to Get Into?
6:08 How NATO's Article 5 Would Help Ukraine
7:05 Article 42(7): The EU's Collective Security Provision
11:09 Why EU Membership Is Still Important
14:10 100,000,000 Total View Celebration!
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Media licensed under CC BY 2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...
By U.S. Secretary of Defense:
www.flickr.com/photos/secdef/...
By Government of Brazil:
www.flickr.com/photos/palacio...
Media licensed under CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...
By Government of Ukraine:
www.zoda.gov.ua/news/21782/vi...
By Kremlin.ru:
tours.kremlin.ru/tour/senate/124/
tours.kremlin.ru/tour/senate/159/
archive.government.ru/eng/docs...
en.kremlin.ru/catalog/keywords...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
By Mil.ru:
structure.mil.ru/management/i...
I realized after recording this that I made #whereseveryone way, way too hard. All of them (Prigozhin, Surovikin, Gerasimov) are in the image starting at 7:40. You may have to do some maneuvering around Zelensky to find them.
the rate of criminals from the eastern EU countries is far too high, our prisons are full of only eastern europeans stealing, shoplifting and what not. The polish robbers even steal copper pipes from the catholic churches and what not.
All these states might fit into the usual american society with similiar crime rates but for sure not into the EU.
Rather time to leave the EU and build the European Powerhouse with only the strongest based on what we had with the EG before where there were not such troubles.
And for sure western farmers will not pay again the bill for the expansion int o the weak east, let the eastern european pay for the huge amount of Ukrainian farm produucts and stalling prices afterwards .
I pay enough to let the ukrainieans fight and that is more than enough. They had 30 years to choose the right alliances and governments so let it be as it is or maybe the USA want another Puerto Rico only a bit bigger population ?
No need for another country which is not behaving as expected and seen before when it had been the EG of the strong and not that EU of the crap dictating how to deal with refugees that do not support ed us during refugee crisis.
And let all the eastern european fight the russians and wwe can prepare the best defenseline along the former ircon curtain along the polish border via austria and italy.
Short and simple. The USA can move all their troops over there and leave the country here. Would be a saver place considering the criminal activities of american citizens like the cia members that were kidnapping europeans across our country and are wanted criminals here, same for the spying of friends. so time to leave into the east of europe where the US troops will have much more fun with the crime rate and what not.
We fought the russians multiple times successfully so we do not care.
I saw Prigozhin and maybe spotted Gerasimov, but I can't see Surovikin at all. It didn't help that you didn't use a standard stock photo like "wheresputin". ^^
@@typxxilpsLay off the substance use buddy, you sound completely unhinged FFS, seek help, stat 😳🤦🏼♂️
It's like finding ants from an airliner, especially if you're not good with faces.
Where's Waldo
When Erdogan says "no", he doesn't mean "no", he's saying his yes is for sale.
F35 say yess.
why are they even in nato? geography but not shared values
@@nelotharen8599 essentially to keep them out of communist influence in the cold war.
also, under Attatürk, turkey had a very progressive legal system for the time. it had womrns voting rights earlier than by far most western democracies, for instance.
it really moved further away from the west under erdogan
@@nelotharen8599i keep asking the same. they do not belong in nato. its like inviting a gender studies kid to the stem hangout
@@nelotharen8599 they used to be kemalist
People can talk all they want about NATO expansion "imperialism" being bad, but the moment Ukraine got bombed and shelled by the supposed "anti-American-led-imperialism" Russia was the wake-up call (hopefully) for anyone who had lingering doubts about the numerous benefits of NATO. Besides, the members countries all voluntarily joined, they were never "annexed".
There is still Putin ass kisser everywhere and they are delusion enough to believe that Ukraine gonna blow up the nuclear power plant that are in the middle of their country.
Honestly, Russia's attack and their 'reasons' for it with one of them being NATO expansion I feel are one of the reasons why a lot of us Swedes here still want NATO membership despite Turkey throwing wrenches into the wheels. It is entirely just to spite Putin and those like him.
Well said 👍
Destruction of Ukraine is the consequence now enjoy your lives
@@libertyprime1776tbf the US is the quiet kid though, as in he killed a few people as well
Let's not forget that the EU contains very angry Polish soldiers, suprisingly many Greek tanks, and several French nuclear SLBMs. It's no USA, but still plenty enough to give food for thought to Russia.
Well those Greek tanks are meant for Turkish tanks. But yes. The EU has a significant force for local European security issues.
Poland is just looking for a reason to go in to russia and Belarus.
@@kurousagi8155Nice.
Yea, especially post-2022 war. The US would have an even bigger incentive to provide aid, and with how much more manpower could be put on frontlines, and considering the current state of the war, it is safe to say Putin would have no chance.
well, we all know now ruzzia is no match for the combined military forces of EU member states. in a few years Poland alone is about to outgun ruzzia.
Obviously Ukraine would want to join the EU for economic reasons, not for reasons concerning territorial integrity. That being said, the only way Ukraine can join NATO is if a) every single Russian soldier has left/been expelled from Ukrainian territory (including Crimea) and b) Russia accepts Ukraine´s 1991 borders so every other NATO member knows theres no chance that a new war could break out at any minute. In other words, Ukraine needs a complete victory (very unlikely ATM).
Very unlikely in the short term maybe, but at the current rate they're grinding down Russia, Ukraine's victory is inevitable save for EU financial support ceasing.
And some pretty weird things need to happen before Poland, the UK and the Netherlands stop hardcore backing Ukraine. The only thing that could defeat Ukraine basically, is if France elects the putin-worshipper Marine Le Pen and Germany loses its spine and both work together to make the EU surrender.
Well that or to give Russia territorial concessions in order to get rid of its border dispute. This assumes that Russia wouldn't just take another small piece of Ukraine to keep it out. That said even if one side approves the other wont.
Russian military has to collapse at one point. The current degree of losses is not sustainable. On all fronts: manpower, machinery, ammunition, technology, intel, leadership.
Not all Russians have to be defeated, just the turning point needs to be reached where efforts seem pointless. This would trigger a domino effect.
@@bastaardzmullerWell,Russia could also descend into civil war anytime,especially after Prigozhin's failed coup that demonstrates how unstable Putin's regime is.
@@thethunderchieftain5464 Could be, but Putin thoroughly eliminated all opposition over a 20 years reign. Wouldnt expect a civil war, more a battle for who's in control in Moscow.
Thanks for the frequent uploading and quality content.
I've been watching your videos for quite some time now. Congrats on the numbers btw. It's not surprising given the quality of your content. Very informative. Keep up the great work. 🙂
Excellent production. I learn’t a great deal. Thank you.
There has been a lot of discussion about bilateral defense agreements outside of NATO. Poland and the baltic states would jump at the chance, probably the UK would agree too. It wouldn't take all of NATO to deter the badly damaged Russian military from trying it again.
With the EU that's kind of given naturaly as well.
Not everyone needs to follow 42(7). It just takes a single EU nation with a border to Russia that's also in NATO, to also invoke article five.
If Ukraine was in the EU and Ukraine gets attacked, Poland will be of the first countries to jump to it's aid. That opens a new front towards Königsberg. And that means NATO deaths protecting their own territorial integrity. And that means Article 5 is triggered as well.
Really. Baltic countries. I laugh at that. Do u know the population of all of them? Is it even 5 millions in all 3? What are they going to defend? With what? One plane costs more than all of their annual income
@@bambinaforever1402 dont worry ruzzian bot even the baltic states with their small military would send your "army" home in body bags
@@bambinaforever1402They may be small, but their economies are doing pretty well, almost at Western European levels. But going beyond that, they can look to Poland and maybe Finland as hegemonic help, as both are heavily militarized / militarizing, and would certainly help out
you don't know what you are talking about. for many years, the UK has been a *staunch opponent* to any attempt made by other EU member states (foremost France) to strengthen the role of the EU in collective military defence and security. they considered any progress on that matter as potentially weakening to NATO. the EU was only able to move on this issue once the UK left as a consequence of Brexit.
EU membership is not a substitute for NATO membership...
Fact is, EU is probably harder to join because there's many more requirements (mostly economic and political) than to join NATO.
@@fakeplaystore7991Average rage bait fanboy.
@@fakeplaystore7991 That's funny when you consider that less than half the population of the Russian Federation is made up of what Putin would consider "real" Russians. The rest are various ethnic minorities.
Truely, but with EU membership in hand, NATO membership can only become easier, surely.
@@fakeplaystore7991 please go take your racist cvnt out of here
I love your videos and the way you structure your arguments... And the way you play with words without losing any factual information
EU membership is much harder to get, especially for Ukraine, then NATO membership and also NATO membership is a unofficial prerequisite for EU membership. So no, it can't be a substitute. You don't run 20mi as a substitution for running 5mi.
But apart from the above, I completely agree that for Ukraine NATO membership would be a priority anyways, especially now. Ukrainians are not stupid they know they aren't getting in the EU anytime soon and they also already have a pre-joining agreement with the EU and have some of the benefits already.
"and also NATO membership is a unofficial prerequisite for EU membership", no it is not. Many EU countries are not part of NATO. I mean, Sweden has been part of the EU for a while, without being part of NATO, and the same was true for Finland. Austria, and Ireland still are not part of NATO (And will most likely not join). The reason why it could seem like a prerequisite is that EU expansion often lag NATO membership, due to how hard it is to meet EUs criteria, while they both operate in the same geographical area. For Ukraine though, it would not surprise me if NATO membership would be required to meet fears of EU countries due to the war (even after it is over).
@@andreassag all of the EU members that joined in the last 20y are NATO members, the only two exceptions are Malta(former UK colony) and Cyprus(disputed by Turkey then also EU candidate). Every single country in Eastern Europe is told that unless they joined NATO they will not enter the EU.
Sweden joined at different time so it's not relevant example. I said unofficial prerequisite. If you want to join the EU every single existing members may require you to first join NATO and they are under no obligation to explain themselves to you. Some use that power. For example some candidates had to give on nuclear power at the time in order to join.
Why do you imagine Albania joined NATO? You think they need security? From what? They've been simply told as all the others that unless they do they will not be let in the EU and that's what they actually want.
@@nikoladd what a stupid nonsense.
@@nikoladd Well, security is a necessary prerequisite for all the rest. It helps to integrate new members into the EU if all security aspects have already been handled. The EU is not (for now) set up to handle security, that's largely up to national governments. And yes, Albania does need help with security. If I'm going to invest billions in Albania, I want to be sure that my investment will be protected. NATO membership will do that.
@@adrien5834 in short you agree with all of my points above, but my phrasing of them insulted you so much that you just had to argue? ok. got it.
Obviously, only the bob semple can end the war with it’s firepower
The Bob Semple Tank is too powerful to be unleashed on the battlefield.
Dude, send that russia might actually nuke everything
Russia loses hundreds of their Soviet tanks? Not a single Bob Semple has ever been so much as seriously damaged in combat!
No,no its the mighty ARJUN tank with its CUMBLAST
Willy, you are doing fantastic job covering the war in my homeland. I really appreciate the tremendous job you are doing on this channel. Thank you!
Hello tomato man
@@captain_cannoli5566 howdy
Greetings to you, Ukrainian intelligence officer, from Ohio, USA.
@@RicardoMartinez-oh9sq You are getting closer, alphabet boi. Keep going
Way to go.... keep helping us to realize complex issues
Spaniel pumping videos every 72h just as an ad for his book ! Love it !
Thank you William. Your channel is one of the best political explainers out there and really helped to form my understanding of the current conflict - right along with German Claudia Major (Security Politics), Vlad Vexlers (social psychology/political philosphy explaining how the Kremlin ticks), Timothy Snyder, Anne Applebaum and Serhii Plohky on the historical perspective, and Brandon Mitchell for his common TacMed Volunteer perspective, and the Austrian Colonel Markus Reisner on military tactics.
Replying so I can find this comment again
The EU isn't "primarily a trading block with aspirations for more." It is more akin to a federation. EU law covers common foreign and security and police and judicial cooperation. It has a Parliament, a Single Currency and Central Bank, and a Court. It has an executive body, the Commission. It has citizenship rights. And there is the matter of culture, history and identity. Being part of the EU is to belong to a family of nations.
Yeah that's also what I thought with all the rules the eu enforces.
As the Greek if they agree
And the Brits.
Thanks William! ❤ and congrats on the views!
Thanks, William!
A big problem is that in previous years when asked to Ukranian people if they wanted to join Nato, the polls never went over 40% positive, most of the population did not want it. Now that the conflict is raging, they want it bad. It is sad, I hope Russia lose this war soon so they can join.
"I hope Russia lose this war *soon--"*
_Not happening._ 😑 _Not "soon" at the very least._
Problematic as it is right now, Russia is still in a comparativwly more stable situation than Ukraine, so they can definitelly keep fighting in this war for a pretty long while yet. Even if too many news channels keep insisting on "Russia will colapse soon". _(guys, I fucking hate Putin too, but let's keep things realistic)_
@@MrDibara Like Germany throughout the World War One. Until 1918
Well, you also had Pro-Russian leaders in power at that time dispensing all manner of pro-russian propaganda. The Crimea annexation in 2014 saw all that change, and in fact saw 50% at that point wishing to join NATO. By 2017 it was 69%. I would hesitate to make the postulation that 'most of the population didn't want it'. Like all polls, It depends on when you ask and who you are asking.
No. It's not that they want to join NATO more.
It's just that they have to say they do.
@@texasray5237care to explain?
Thank you for the video❤
you deserve the views! great information.
Always interesting sir.
NATO membership for Ukraine is obviously the end goal here.
There was a brief window of opportunity for post USSR Russia to brought into the fold. Post Cold War triumphalism combined with Russian paranoia and immense corruption derailed this.
They earned the reputation lets be real here. I also do not think this would have derailed the current course.
13:35 "That does not directly solve the Turkey problem." Where, excluding fowl, both meanings are applicable.
How brilliant! Thank you William for that very informativ video on a hot topic!
I can’t believe more people haven’t subscribed. you deserve it!
Not enough people are talking about the Budapest memorandum, which a lot of countries signed, including russia and the USA, making Ukraine untouchable
It was talked talked about at the begging, however when was the last time a dictator kept their word? RF is making claims even on Alaska...
Well, clearly Russia has "touched" it. So I guess that memorandum was written on wet paper.
Well nobody expected that Russian Federation of all countries with veto in UN could go full unga bunga and invade Ukraine.
@@noneshere Go look for a real job you'll get cut soon since Prigozhin is on the loose and bot farms are in shambles.
@@noneshere RUSSIA signed it, CHINA signed it
Hi William!
This channel is my primary source of news and analysis for the conflict. I don't know if that strikes joy or terror in Mr. Spaniel's heart.
Thanks for sharing
Thanks for the videos, love to see your takes and analysis
Zelensky's journey towards presidency is comedic and so beautifully ironic, I love it. The fact that he is a _good_ president on top of that just makes it even better.
He was the puppet of an Oligarch and not try to install his own regime
@@ravanpee1325Grow TF up 🙄🤡
He wasn’t a great peacetime president, but he’s the wartime president Ukraine needs to stay United.
@@LuckyFlanker13 Agreed, he's an excellent figurehead, which is what is needed right now.
@@ravanpee1325 There is no proof that what you are saying is true. It's more like a political narrative designed to frame Zelensky and raise doubts among the citizens. There were no decisions made by Zelensky that would benefit the said Oligarch, they do not share any values, views or opinions, and they've never interacted. The only reason why this accusation emerged is because they both are Jews. Claiming that a person is someone else's political puppet solely on their ethnicity is racist.
Bravo ! William - well done analyses
Great content
Thanks
Thanks for “splaining” the less obvious differences between NATO and the EU. It makes it easier for me when my students ask about it. Also, I love your humor in these videos. I find myself laughing out loud in my classroom as I’m cleaning up.
U need that to be explained on youtube and u have students? Dear lord. I hope u re just a cleaner
The UK proposed ditching the membership action plan step and providing Ukraine with a simplified pathway to joining Nato, like Finland and Sweden.
Uk doesn't dictate Nato doctrine, there's only a fast track assuming all countries agree to their entry in the first place, which is why Sweden still isn't in.
Finland and Sweden do not have corrupted government and have ready full functioning army with modern weapons. Ukrainians do not have any of that - all weapons were given to them for free and all the weapons they were supposed to buy before war on western money are invested in their yachts and palaces. Everyone says how corrupted russian government is - ukrainian is the same. So do not compare fully functioning democratic countries with good economy with corrupted country with no army no economy. If they did not have help from us, which is half stolen, they would be occupied by russia long time ago. And now they re at war with russia and half of their government is pro russian. Until they fix all of that there is no place for Ukraine in EU or NATO
@@Clarkem1 "Proposed", not ordered.
The UK is politically and economically unstable, yet it somehow still maintains its leadership role as a bedrock NATO member state. Like when it was the first NATO nation to send Western-made battle tanks to Ukraine, which made Washington and Berlin move their feet.
@@kingace6186 I think it's more likely that the UK is just the flal guy: they do what America wants and if somethign goes wrong, the UK gets the blame.
Thank you 🎉
Thanks for the Douglas Adams reference ❤
Interesting take on the EU as a stepping stone to NATO for Kyiv. It seems to have historically worked backward. Most of the newer EU members from the Eastern Bloc joined NATO before the EU. The EU never made NATO a requirement but it didn't seem to hurt applications. In fact, jumping through the hurdles of getting a unanimous vote for NATO entry required good relations with a lot of EU members, ultimately helping move EU applications along for the new partners. And although the democracy and governance requirements for NATO are not particularly strongly defined, with NATO even including a few dictatorships along the way, the EU does have requirements in this area. EU members that are also NATO members were more likely feel strongly about applying stronger standards for democratic institutions to new candidates that just happened to bring those nations more in line with eventual conditions for joining the EU.
I would even go as fast as to say most countries saw NATO simply away to enter the EU and never took it seriously as a military alliance. Much to the detriment of themselves, both organisation and Europe as a whole.
@@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462eh I don't know how you get past the whole "an attack on one is an attack on all" language in the NATO charter. You can't sign that and not think about it a bit.
@@JMurph2015 You can if you're a politician.
@@JMurph2015 as the video itself stressed (or read the treaty): it's only an _obligation_ , there is no compulsion to actually aid another member state if you don't want to.
For Eastern Europe, Nato was a guarantee for further investors that the shit we see today in Ukraine - won`t happen. You don`t want your brand new factory to be bombed by ruzzkyes !
Nice as always. More frequent videos
Certified first comment!
Will you do one on the ZNPP?
@@dualtronix4438 If something happens, yes. If not, I have discussed the issues with it enough before that I do not have anything new to add. If the drama continues for long enough, then I will accumulate enough new material to warrant an update.
@@Gametheory101 Saw this video on my feed within 5 seconds of being published lol.
Hope it doesn't escalate badly
@@Gametheory101 Question is: I have a LOT of friends and their family being quite nervous and f00ked up because of all rumors. In Kyiv, in Nikopol (what's left), in Ternopil and in the west. Apparently the native news of Ukraine is reporting a LOT about the risks, hyping people up big time. What is the picture behind this? Why is the panic so big? Whats your assesment on this panic?
Thank you for this analysis, I cannot agree more.
A truely overdue congratulations on the success of the channel Will. I neef you and Perun to collaborate on something, that'd be amazing
I get it now. The lines on maps guy is on vacations from the University. That is why he is posting so often.
It’s funny to me that NATO membership is seen as harder than EU membership, considering the complex economic efforts required to synchronize Ukraine’s economic and financial systems with those of the Union that will likely take a decade at the least.
You can thank Erdogan & Orban for that.
The answer to that is quite easy.
One the one hand, if it goes south you lose a lot of money.
On the other hand you lose a lot of money and a hell of a lot more.
@@RunawayTrain2502 thank you Erdogan and Orban. Until u learn how not to steal
Yeah I think this is what non Eu citizens don't get about it. Joining Eu is much more difficult. The bar is much higher to clear because Eu policies encompass multiple factors (economical, governmental, monetary...) .
That being said, These are just laws that can be overrule with enough political will from Germany and Fr.
I wonder how long until Turkey is kicked from the EU for corruption and supporting Russia, if they didn't have such a good position geographically they never would have been accepted to the EU.
This was excellent!
Love them daily uploads
Article 42(7) or EU's Help-a-Friend-In-Need treaty, as I call it, is most certainly an after thought. Only case I can think of it ever being used is when Finland sent men to France, to replace some of the men who were sent to the Middle East.
Was it specifically mentioned as the reason? France asked Finland for help within this provision?
There´s also article 5 and putin is pushing it, for it to go into affect.
Ukraine will not become EU member anytime soon, proly not within this decade. More likely is Nato membership after war, but it aint certain or very likely as well. Only thing they can actualy expect from nato summit in Vilnus is some kind of road map for nato membership.
The only reason to fear a defensive alliance is when you plan to attack that alliance
I remember when Iraq, Libya and Yugoslavia attacked NATO and NATO had to fought back.
@@antoniodelaugger9236 No, he (or she) has memory problems.
Nice analysis!
What about the NAFO conference?
NAFO 69th sniffing brigade 😊
There is one problem with the theory that EU is a good stepping stone to get into NATO. It's more like NATO is a good stepping stone to get into EU.
EU membership guarantees financial investments for the new member in far larger amounts than any foreign investments. It's almost like an unwritten rule that EU candidate's have to be part of NATO or have a insanely strong independent army or at least not have hostile neighbors, in order to have any chance of actually getting in.
As always, liked shared & already subscribed. Thanks William.
Good one.
I think that security won't be an afterthought of any discussion on Ukrainian EU accession. But the EU struggled even in the Balkans, and came to depend on America there. And the instincts of Germany and France have seemed wrong before and early in this conflict (though von der Leyen and the eastern and northern EU countries seemed much more clued in).
It all points to the limitations of existing organizations. To secure peace and prosperity, a larger organization of countries of similar values is needed, for both security and ideally trade, spanning much more of the world, with more power to deter, and also to absorb large countries like Ukraine, and, quite possibly, Russian states after the conflict.
EU was with Ukraine from the start, the problem was the national governments. Which just shows even more reasons why the EU needs to unify into a single state, national governments keep failing where the EU continues to succeed even while being held back by those same national governments.
Also, even just getting Ukraine into the EU will likely boost it quite a bit; it’s already capable of exporting quite a bit of foodstuffs, being able to do that with the advantages of EU membership will strengthen its economy.
Ukraine is so much poorer than the Western parts of the EU that combining them economically, politically and socially would be a disaster.
It is a terrible idea. But the Bundesbank will never allow it.
Very interesting video👍
I'll never forget article 42(7). Iron Thunder Strikes Fear! 4-27 'Iron Thunder' Field Artillery was my old unit.
NATO would be foolish to not accept Ukraine into its fold after the war, because if they don't then Ukraine will need to develop nuclear weapons to deter future Russian invasions.
Since Ukraine is too young as a western nation, so it would be best if they are not forced to go into nuclear weapons, especially since they already have nuclear technology and it would not take them long to achieve it.
Funny thing is Ukraine had nukes it got rid of them in exchange for Russia not invading that deal certainly didn't hold up
This isn't Hoi4 lil Timmy, that's not how nuclear weapons programmes work.
Nobody will let ukraine develop anything. How is that working with iran or north korea
That's not how Nuclear weapons system work my friend. That said i do agree that NATO would be foolish not to allow a Nation that has shown the capability of fighting the whole reason NATO exists on it's own (although with NATO and other countries providing material and weapons). All those tanks and Jets and weapon systems NATO has provided to Ukraine will essentially go full circle back into NATO hands as long as Ukraine joins (provided Ukraine gets to keep those after the war). NATO has spent dozens of Billions to turn Ukraine into a military superpower that can give Russia a run for it's money. It would be foolish not to let in the beast they created
There is a reason why Finland and Sweden, both EU members, see joining NATO as their best security option
If I were to advise Ukraine I would say that NATO membership will be easier to achieve than EU membership and includes her key military backers the UK and USA, who are not members of the EU
Think about how much backing Germany and France came up with at the start of the invasion.
Imagine if you did'nt forget the Minsk treaty.
@@kitkatrg7976wasn't that treaty made with Ukraine, USA, UK and USSR? as far as i know the USSR doesn't exists anymore.
@@mysteron3693 no, minsk is after 2013. you're talking about budapest memorandum. minsk is when russia forced ukraine to sign an agreement with their proxy(because at the time they denied their involvement in the donbass)
Actually not because of article 42 abs 7
However, such an obligation to provide assistance in the event of an alliance arises from the Lisbon Reform Treaty in force in the European Union, which entered into force in December 2009. There, Article 42(7) TEU stipulates that in the event of an armed attack on the territory of a Member State, the other Member States shall owe it all the aid and assistance in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter [UN Charter]. Article 42(7) TEU also makes clear that obligations and cooperation in this area shall remain consistent with those undertaken within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO].
What are the consequences of invoking Art. 42(7) TEU?
The obligation to assist described in Art. 42(7) TEU clearly goes beyond the content of Art. 5 NATO Treaty. Indeed, Art. 5 NATO Treaty only requires a duty to render assistance that is deemed necessary, whereas Art. 42(7) TEU obliges Member States to do everything in their power. The
The use of armed force can therefore be demanded by the member state declaring an alliance case on the basis of Article 42(7) TEU.
However, Article 42(7) TEU does not provide for a limitless obligation to provide assistance. All measures must be taken in close coordination with the United Nations, since NATO's tasks and objectives under Article 42(7) TEU may not be impaired by the activation of the European mutual assistance clause.
Invoking Article 42(7) TEU also has the advantage of appealing to the solidarity of member states that are not members of NATO, such as Austria, Ireland, Sweden or Finland.
But is Article 42(7) TEU applicable at all in the event of a terrorist attack?
Art. 42(7) TEU speaks only of an "armed attack." However, this provision is opposed by Art. 222 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union [TFEU], which is to be explicitly invoked in the case of terrorist attacks or terrorist threats. Consequently, it is questionable whether Art. 42(7) TEU is applicable only in the case of armed conflicts. War merely means a conflict that is organized and carried out with the use of considerable means with weapons and violence, but which always exists between states. The Islamic State (IS), however, cannot be considered a state under the three-element doctrine.
As a loophole for Art. 42(7) TEU, however, Art. 51 UN Charter can be consulted, which stipulates a right of self-defense of every UN state in the event of an "armed attack." In two resolutions, the Security Council of the United Nations has indicated that acts of terrorism can also be regarded as armed attacks.
Thus, the application of Article 42 (7) TEU can also be affirmed in the case of terrorist attacks.
Main reason that most NATO countries in Europe are in EU, is to make sure that there are no very poor NATO countries on verge of collapse. NATO can not give money to NATO countries. That's why EU exist to do that.
EU is the extension of NATO. Without NATO, EU will not exist, some countries give a lot of money to other, like Germany and Denmark give a lot money to EU. They would not have any interest to do that without NATO.
Droppin facts here...nice
Oh I thought it was article 43. But, thank you you are right it's 42.7! I live in Dallas, Texas. Great video!
I fear Ukraine won't get EU membership any time soon, and may not get NATO membership ever, but hopefully I am wrong on both. It seems clearly correct EU Membership would not be nothing, and anything that encourages closer ties is good for everyone (except Russia) in the long run. Any incremental progression to be welcomed.
No, I didn't know the article.
Yeah I think EU membership might actually be a harder goal than NATO in the end. EU is not ready for Ukraine to become it's 5th largest member with something like 55 MEP's and the shift of power eastwards, away from the Franco-Prussian nexus which such a membership would trigger.
@@Elldallan what power? To have power a county must have high economy. Ukraine is the poorest country of them all because government steals everything.
Alternatively, Polish/ other nato members can conduct “training excersizes” near the Russia/Ukraine border indefinitely after the war ends
Or dare I say...
*SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATIONS*
Finland would fuck Russia up right now. Today. Without the help of any of the rest of nato. If you weren't sure before the special moron operation, it has been shown to all the world since last Feb lol. I would love to see Poland, the Baltics and Finland conduct joint training ops soon.
Poland is chomping at the bit to have a fight with Russia.
👍Thank you.
Good reporting. Go Ukraine.
I think we should draw a line between the active areas of the war in the east and the rest of Ukraine. The exact borders should be decided by realities on the ground, but we should extend Article V to the rest of Ukraine. Currently, with very few exceptions, we pressure Ukraine not to attack into Russia directly. We could draw a line and say, "Over here is war... Donbas, Crimea... and we recognize the Russia is already engaged combat in these territories, and that the war will keep going in that area, but over here we have the rest of Ukraine, and if Russia attacks beyond the immediate area we consider it attack and invoke Article V. Basically, Ukraine gets to keep fighting to regain their land, but if Russia launches a new offensive towards Kiev we send troops and push as far past the Russian border as strategically needed to secure all of Ukraine.
dangerous thinking. there is no valid reason for Ukraine to consider giving up an inch of its territory to a bully like ruzzia, and that includes Crimea. the despicable regime in moscow is unworthy to get even the smallest concession for its brutal, unprovoked and illegal war of aggression.
Zelensky would never agree to that,that would also be a victory for Russia. Anyway Russia will prevail.
11:36 this has to be the most underreported thing in the last decade.
In reality this was the original spark which lit a fuse that set various explosions off.
Why the Ukrainian government at the time did a 180 seemingly overnight has never been investigated or the reasons explained. William that would be a brilliant video if you could find enough information on it.
you dont know? - he obviously was bought by the russians
I love this channel.
Subscribed.
Isn't NATO already acting as if Article 5's been invoked with regards to Ukraine? Basically, every NATO country, except maybe Hungary, is providing military aid to Ukraine, which is something they've decided on. If Ukraine joined NATO tomorrow, what would change? What force on Earth would force other NATO countries to send boots on the ground to Ukraine? There is none. Of course, one could bring up the alliance abandonment issue, but then again, Art. 5 does not explicitly state that the NATO countries should go to war, if Art. 5 is invoked, but rather that they should act at their own discretion to help and in this case it would be as if they've just decided it's enough that they only provide aid to Ukraine in the form of weapons, training, intelligence, etc. I guess this would set a bad precedent since this isn't the spirit in which Art. 5's been written, which chips away at the deterrence of collective defense, but who's to say that NATO wouldn't change their minds for future conflicts or on a case by case basis?
Well, ever heard of the American navy Air Force? It’s the second strongest airforce in the word. Right behind the US Air Force.
Iraq once had the 4th strongest army in the world, an a USA + Allies air campaign destroyed them in 6 weeks. In Syria & Iraq, the USA once again collected experience with integrating a foreign army (the Kurdish forces) with the American air forces, to drive out a common enemy (ISIL terrorist groups).
All that flying air power is currently doing nothing to Russian forces in Ukraine. Do you wanna bet what American planes will inflict if article 5 gets pulled?
Or, what the Turkish navy and its submarines will do with the Russian Black Sea fleet? What polish artillery will leave of Kaliningrad, potentially?
It's not inconceivable to imagine if Ukraine got both NATO and EU members in the 2000s events still played out more or less the same. Russia still attacked. Ukraine got large but still indirect support with no toops deployment. Likewise if Putin had tried to annex part of Finland in 2014. I don't think we would have had the same muted response we saw with Crimea regardless of member status. You can call it favouritism if you want. But Finland was part of western Europe Ukraine not so much.
Ukraine shouldn't have to give up any land.
They should get EVERYTHING back and Russia should pay for every single brick to rebuild all the damage they've caused... and that doesn't even cover all the lives they've ruined.
yeah maybe once they can march to moscow, russia would be willing to pay for war reparations
5:13 - mind blown
There has to be at least a MAP given to Ukraine, or NATO will seriously embarrass themselves and leave Ukrainians very disappointed.
There is no NATO expansionism. There are simply more countries trying to escape from Russia's sphere of influence.
There's no soviet Union anymore nato shouldn't be in Europe but Asia. and ukraine had signed a pack it would not join any alliance and stay neutral in exchange to give up the nukes but zelensky broke it which led to the war.
@@cluster4583 Ukraine wanting to join the EU for the economic benefits in no way excuses Russia's behavior - which is what prompted all of this. Remember, this crap started in 2014 when Russia's puppet president got the boot, not when Zelensky was elected.
This right here... If Russia doesn't want anybody allying with the USA, maybe they should try making allying with Russia the better deal? But they won't, because no way on earth would anybody want to ally with Russia considering how they treat their allies and their own country. And Russia says Ukraine is Russia... Look how they're treating it!
Oh wow, let me think... This is a tough one.
13:29 i was so sure this was a Segway into a Vpn ad or the like
I think the real issue is that astute leaders recognize that Ukraine is worthy 6 times over in both groups. In addition and just as pressing ….Ukraine is actively fighting to protect the rest of the world from the RF and its agenda. Articles are words. They need to get it together.
So. Bombing russian people s in Donetsk for over 9 years and supporting neofascists like Azov is not a valid reason for Russia's "agenda" to protect itself?
Except nobody really wants Ukraine in the EU.
@@chronicallyuh7574Exactly. Ukraine would straight up suck all the money from EU net providers just like Poland
Agree ,however I see Putin over time bombing half of Ukraine making it uninhabitable.Putin can manufacture 65 or so missiles a month.If brain dead Biden won’t allow Ukraine to bomb military sites,that’s exactly what will happen. Biden has given Ukraine enough to fight the war but not win the war Biden is pure evil but covers it well
@@silasmedvedev8019that's not true at all- Ukraine has (or had) massive agriculture and oil reserves off the shore of Crimean peninsula. True, Ukraine is currently bombed to bits and in a war with a genocidal regime led by a psychopath, so in this sense it's true that it would be more of a investment, but not a net money sink like hungary or poland
I would prefer NATO to EU membership, I don't see Ukraine meeting the EUs economic requirements i.e. I don't see the Economic or Political benefit in a Ukrainian membership, It would be preferable to extend them a guarantee of Independence or defense securities
Oh believe me, Ukraine can potentially contribute more to the EU than Poland or Hungary. They are economically less developed (for now) but socially they are more progressive which can be a good addition for the whole EU.
Glorifying nazi collaborators and war criminals is really the progressive shift the EU needs. 🤣
never heard of article 42:7, but as the numbering suggests, it was probably an after thought
Good on ya Bill! A 100 mil! ...And like many TH-camrs, I thank you for replacing the mainstream news as a trustworthy source.
The difference between Putin and Zelensky:
When hostile Russian troops breached the borders of Zelensky’s capitol, Zelensky refused a lift into exile offered by the Americans and asked for ammunition instead, deciding he would face the same fate as the rest of his fellow citizens, despite knowing he would never be allowed to survive as a prisoner.
When hostile Russian troops didn’t even get to the borders of Putin’s capitol, Putin fled to St Petersburg, leaving the citizens to fend for themselves. Now, every day that Prigozhin jets around Russia and Belarus, whilst Wagner only strengthens itself and recruits from Belarusian jails, openly defying Putin’s edict to fold them into the official armed forces, Putin looks clearly, palpably, visibly weakened.
The comparison between Putin’s cowardice and Zelensky’s heroism has never been starker in the west. Whilst Muscovites are watching their standards of living continue to slip, and losing relatives to a war they cannot understand, for a guy who ran out on them at the first hint of trouble that didn’t even come for him! You cannot save face while you still have a bloody nose that simply will not stop bleeding so long as Prigozhin shows he has more power than Putin in real terms.
If Russians aren’t wondering whether all their sacrifices are pointless now, they never will.
_Something important to know, for all who are interested in history and/or support Ukraine:_
_Rus' ought not to be confused with modern “Russia”, which derives its name from the Rus' but historically is a completely different state, which almost all its existence was at war with the Rus'._
_Just like the Holy Roman Empire was actually Germany, “Russia” is actually Muscovy, despite their best attempts to convince everybody otherwise._
_Its name “Russia" received only in the 18th century, when Peter I simply changed Muscovy’s name into the “All Russian Empire” (Russia originates from Rosia, name used by the Greek Orthodox Clergy in regards to Rus')_
_Under the reign of Cathrine II Muscovites where even punished for continuing to identify as Muscovites, and were forced to call themselves Russian._
_Lands that Russia (Muscovy) claims were part of the original Rus', but actually weren't, are Novgorod, Suzdal, and Ryazan, since in historical texts of XI-XII centuries they are mentioned as separate entities from Rus'. They can be considered parts of extended Rus', although their culture was distinct from main Rus'._
_In 1493, Muscovite duke Ivan III appointed himself to be the Great Ruler of All Rus'. No other kings acknowledged that. From that point on Muscovy started to make false claims on Rus' ownership._
_“Russia” is an offshoot of Ukraine and not the other way round, despite what Soviet and Russian (Muscovite) historians have been trying to say for years. A Slavicised Finnic, then later, Mongolized offshoot. Kyiv was a developed cultured capital when Moscow was just another swamp village._
_Germany used to call itself the Holy Roman Empire, that didn’t mean they became the Romans, and all of a sudden had a right to claim whole of Italy and its history, but yet, that’s exactly what Russia (Muscovy) did in regards to Rus'-Ukraine, which is a horrible injustice!_
42 is "The Question to the Answer of the Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything"..... mjustsayin'
Well deserved, my go to Ukraine news channel 👏
As a citizen of the EU I'm not completely sure how to think of Ukrainian membership, albeit tiny, there is a growth in the idea of European federalism, and I think a brand new member wont be so keen on cooperating towards that goal.
There's more than a tiny part that want federalism and its growing. There's also already a solution to the issue of some members not wanting to join a federation, simply keep the EU as is, and those who want to join into a federation joins the new EF which would still be in the EU.
@@FarsightAEthe EU has perfected the onion approach to government, very well.
@@DrumToTheBassWoop Well it would have been more efficent but nationalist governments in countries like Poland and Hungary have repeatedly stopped any such reforms.
@@FarsightAE alas, were not ready as humans to elevate to next level of existence unfortunately. Too tribal.
Well since it's such a tiny want among very select groups then it really shouldn't impact anything
We should’ve let them join nato after the annexation of crimea
Regardless of the war, Ukraine is and has always been a very corrupt country. It's not like letting a saint join the community.
Theoretically yes, but in practise that would've meant NATO was at war with Russia in 2014.
I mean I volunteered for our possible MH17 deployment so I aint argueing against you, but it's just not realistic back then. Only the Netherlands and the UK had a motive to back Ukraine in 2014, the rest would've b*tched out.
Nah it should have been before that because Russia would never have attacked in the first place if Ukraine was in NATO at the time
Thank you for your experience about the EU
The European countries.
Love you
You forgot to mention that in the rather unlikely event Ukraine joins the EU soon, it would have a veto over Turkey joining. That would more or less counterbalance Turkey's veto on Ukraine's NATO membership.
So they can blackmail Turkey into letting Swedes into Nato 😒
Turkey will never join EU
Where does this thought about Turkey vetoing Ukraine’s NATO entry comes from? Turkey has been a proponent of both Ukraine and Georgia joining the pact for the better part of the last 10 years, since 2014. Ukraine being stopped has never been about Turkey. And Turkey is not joining EU. Goddamn people are clueless.
You missed a small crucial point. Rules don't apply, even if Ukraine enters the eu,it doesn't mean that leaders would get out of their way to help Ukraine, the situation is the same with NATO except.... 1 tiny difference, the US. If you think EU , what do you think? Germany? France? Spain? All of europe? Probably everyone thinks something else. When you think NATO, you think US always,this way the US is like a banner for NATO and if the laws are breached and the US doesn't defend Ukraine ( a nato ally in this case) , their whole legitimacy will fall worldwide. They have to defend them or else most countries of the world which have defensive pacts with the US will think "they probably won't defend us as well" , example being South Korea, Japan etc. Eu is continental and shared, NATO is worldwide and centered around the US (mostly). Ukraine and Russia know this and they both know Russia can't take on NATO. They will both try their best to achieve their goal.
So i stand by Ukraine with their "NATO or nothing decision"
05:47
A sigh of relief!
9:16 I'll actually go ahead and take that victory lap, and take pride in that I have the same memory technique for it. X)
I'm personally not very keen on having Ukraine within the EU at this time for multiple reasons. The EU association agreement has been highly controversial in the Netherlands since 2013, before the invasion of Crimea even. We even held a referendum about it back in 2016 which the government sort of ignored.
Netherlands can leave NATO any time they want. They can then sponge off NATO for protection.
So what is the problem with EU membership for Netherlands
@@sylviamaresca8852nothing he's just a russian troll.
I always think of NATO involved with Ukraine's current conflict in terms of Iraq. Yes, it wasn't the entirety of NATO against Iraq, but that tiny fraction of it reduced it to the stone age, as is popularly told. Now imagine that fraction reflecting to the whole, and that whole against Russia. Russia probably won't even exist, which is hypothetically terrifying.
Agreed
@@fakeplaystore7991They still had sarin
@@fakeplaystore7991 True, at least no nuclear WMDs. Let's go in on Russia and find out if that saber they love rattling actually exists or is it just a hilt? Both Iraq and Russia have chemical WMDs at least.
@@terrified057t4lets do it. You make me want to reenlist. Let the nukes fly, maybe we get a day off work.
@@jesse8600 Day off? as if. Gotta keep hope at least...
Hitchhiker’s guide to the galaxy!!!
Thank u king
If you attack one of their members, the EU will be very, VERY angry…
And they will write you a letter, telling how angry they are!!!
I’m here for my victory lap here in the comments.
This stuff is superior to the vast majority of peer reviewed material out there.