NATO leaders will vow to pour weapons into Ukraine for another year, but membership is off the table
BRUSSELS (AP) — NATO leaders plan to pledge next week to keep pouring arms and ammunition into Ukraine at current levels for at least another year, hoping to reassure the war-ravaged country of their ongoing support and show Russian President Vladimir Putin that they will not walk away.
U.S. President Joe Biden and his counterparts meet in Washington for a three-day summit beginning Tuesday to mark the military alliance’s 75th anniversary as Russian troops press their advantage along Ukraine’s eastern front in the third year of the war.
Speaking to reporters Friday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said NATO’s 32 member countries have been spending around 40 billion euros ($43 billion) each year on military equipment for Ukraine since the war began in February 2022 and that this should be “a minimum baseline” going forward.
“I expect allies will decide at the summit to sustain this level within the next year,” Stoltenberg said. He said the amount would be shared among nations based on their economic growth and that the leaders will review the figure when they meet again in 2025.
NATO is desperate to do more for Ukraine but is struggling to find new ways. Already, NATO allies provide 99% of the military support it gets. Soon, the alliance will manage equipment deliveries. But two red lines remain: no NATO membership until the war is over, and no NATO boots on the ground there.
At their last summit, NATO leaders agreed to fast-track Ukraine’s membership process — although the country is unlikely to join for many years — and set up a high-level body for emergency consultations. Several countries promised more military equipment.
Yes because it started years before the war with the annexation of Crimea.
The war started with the annexation of Crimea. It has been going on since 2014.
This is purely semantics, but neither side had launched a full scale invasion in the years following the annexation until 2022.
Russia launched an invasion in 2014 that took Crimea and created two "independent" "republics" that are backed by Russia and are fighting Ukraine still. Stop spreading misinformation about the conflict.
Read the Nemtsov report https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putin._War
This is a sizable invasion too. Smaller, but enough to become a war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas--
If that is your definition of war then the USA is at war with Russia. I'm not denying that Russia is responsible for all of this and a warmongering state, but to say it's exactly the same now as it was 8 years ago is very silly.
I wrote that it is a smaller invasion, but sizeable enough to constitute an invasion and a war, I absolutely did not say that it is the same now as it was 8 years ago, don't strawman.
What are you saying again? That it is not a war if it is not large enough to be on the headlines you read every day? Because western media made a conscious effort to look the other way to avoid getting dragged into a conflict with russia for a country that had hardly an army to defend itself in 2014. If there were 30000 americans doing tours in Ukraine, you'd know. But there aren't even any foreign fighters of any kind inside russia, so that is no reason to think the USA is at war with russia, there is no analogy whatsoever with sending troops to Ukraine to back up the russian separatists. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-russia-soldiers/some-12000-russian-soldiers-in-ukraine-supporting-rebels-u-s-commander-idUSKBN0LZ2FV20150303/
I really don't get your point unless you're trying to be a russian troll.
I'm saying that it was a territorial dispute before it was a war, which was why Ukraine was not allowed to join NATO even before the war.
If I were a Russian troll I wouldn't be shitting all over them in every single comment.
https://www.rferl.org/a/from-not-us-to-why-hide-it-how-russia-denied-its-crimea-invasion-then-admitted-it/29791806.html
Are you having a seizure or something? Maybe you meant to respond to somebody else?
I made my case. Read the sources, make up your mind, debate with your peers, what else do you want, to play flame war?
Case against what, exactly?