Path to NATO membership is key, let Kyiv be aggressive and other commentary

Once the Ukraine war ends, Kyiv “must join NATO,” argues William B.Taylor at The New York Times.“The last time the United States tried to secure NATO membership for Ukraine” in 2008 we failed, as Germany and France “were immovable in their opposition.”Both “believed they could shape Russian actions by forging closer ties with Moscow — mistakenly, as it turned out.”And “NATO’s failure to offer Ukraine” a path to membership likely gave Vladimir Putin confidence the West wouldn’t act if he invaded.“The lessons from 2008 for today” include: 1) “NATO membership is necessary to deter Russian aggression.” 2) “To achieve NATO membership for Ukraine, the United States must start early, making it a clear priority for the next NATO summit.”“Europe will not be secure — and will not be whole and free — until Ukraine is in NATO.”While the “Biden administration’s steadfast support for Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression has been laudable,” Peter Juul argues at the Hill, “the administration persists in setting too many constraints on when and where Kyiv can use U.S.

weapons for fear of antagonizing Vladimir Putin.”That the fear is unwarranted: “Anything below the threshold of direct NATO involvement will likely not provoke a significant response against the United States or its allies.”And “with new long-range munitions on the way to Ukraine, it’s well past time for the U.S.to remove remaining restrictions on Kyiv’s use of American-supplied weapons.”That “can reduce the pressure on Ukrainian forces fighting on the frontlines” as well as erode “Moscow’s capacity for terror attacks against Ukrainian civilians.” Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Please provide a valid email address.

By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.Never miss a story.

“Argentina has seen enormous bene...