NATO’s Fast Approaching “Moment of Truth” on Ukraine

In April, not long after NATO marked its 75 th anniversary, during a little-noticed press conference at the Alliance’s Headquarters in Brussels, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declared, “if Allies face a choice between meeting NATO capability targets and providing more aid to Ukraine, my message is clear: Send more to Ukraine.” Flanked by the prime ministers of Czechia, Denmark, and the Netherlands, the outgoing secretary general continued on this theme praising Denmark for its decision to donate all of its artillery systems to Ukraine. In acknowledging the dilemma some Allies face between investing in their own security and providing assistance to Ukraine, the NATO leader has shattered the longstanding taboo in NATO against portraying military aid to Ukraine and the Alliance’s own security interests as a zero-sum game, where one party’s gain comes at the expense of another party’s loss. The notion that there are tradeoffs between supporting Ukraine and NATO allies’ national readiness levels is an uncomfortable topic of conversation, to be sure. It is certainly not a debate that Allied leaders wish to have, much less one they want to see play out publicly. But as the NATO Alliance inches ever closer to assuming a more direct role in the Ukraine War, it’s increasingly a conversation that needs to be held, however uncomfortable it may be to do so. Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud The timing and language of Stoltenberg’s appeal for members of the NATO alliance to prioritize assistance to Ukraine over national military capability targets was prompted by Ukraine’s recent military setbacks and the fear that it could face further territorial losses following the stronger-than-expected Russian military advance and multi-month delay of the US military assistance package this spring. With many in the Alliance anxiously awaiting the final outcome of difficult political negotiations over the US Congressional vote for the Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act in Washington, D.C. at the time, one can perhaps understand Stoltenberg’s decision to take advantage of the media opportunity to convey a sense of urgency to Allied capitals. However, the NATO leader’s urgency appeared no less lessened after the US Congress passed the Act in mid-April. Standing next to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv the following week, the Alliance’s longest-serving, senior-most political figure repeated his message that given a choice between meeting NATO’s national capability targets set by Allied military planners or providing military support to Ukraine, Allies “should support Ukraine.” To hammer home this message, he underscored that “Stocks can and will be replenished. Lives lost can never be regained.” In acknowledging the dilemma some NATO members face between meeting their national and alliance security commitments and supplying weapons and ammunition to Ukraine, Stoltenberg is responding to recent concerns raised by Allied capitals about how much military assistance they can afford to provide Ukraine. For Ukraine, the timing could not be worse. As Russia intensified its air and drone strikes against Ukrainian energy and civilian targets this spring, the Zelenskyy government increased its appeals to NATO allies for more air defense support. While some, like Germany, responded by pledging an additional Patriot battery to the one already sent, others like Greece and Poland refused to send their systems on the grounds that they need them for their own defenses. Earlier this spring, there were rumors that Spain, bowing to pressure from fellow Allies, would also send a Patriot system to Ukraine. However, this did not materialize. While Madrid has pledged to send a dozen Patriot missiles to Ukraine, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez used the occasion of President Erdogan’s visit to his country in June to make clear that Spain’s Patriot air defense system would remain in Turkey, where it has been based since 2015 as part of a NATO mission to protect against the ballistic missile threat from Syria. Although further announcements about the transfer of additional air defense systems to Ukraine are expected in the lead-up to next month’s summit, given European governments’ own shortages in this regard they are reluctant to deplete their capabilities to meet Ukraine’s needs without first receiving commitments from the United States that they will backfill the systems. Indeed, air defense has emerged as one of the critical vulnerabilities in the alliance’s arsenal in recent years, leading to difficult decisions about when and which systems to surrender to Kyiv.