Should Ukraine agree to NATO membership in exchange for territories?
Let's imagine that Ukraine agreed to a "peace deal", as described in an article by The Economist: "membership in NATO in exchange for territory".
What does this mean in practice?
Ukraine signs a temporary ceasefire agreement with the Russian Federation.
At the same time, Ukraine receives an invitation to NATO and signs the Accession Protocol, in which Ukraine is de facto recognized within the territories it currently controls.
After that, the process of ratification begins — the accession of Ukraine by all NATO countries.
What is Putin's natural reaction?
It is quite obvious: while the ratification is ongoing – and it can last for years – find any reason to locally violate the ceasefire agreement and win back at least a piece of territory in Ukraine, which, according to the already signed accession protocol, is covered by "NATO guarantees".
Thus, the West finds itself close to the very choice it has been trying to avoid all this time: as soon as Ukraine completes the process of joining NATO, NATO receives a formal ticket to war with Russia.
The first question: does anyone believe that under such conditions the ratification of the protocol of Ukraine's accession to NATO will ever be completed?
Second question: Does anyone believe that Western politicians and analysts did NOT foresee such a scenario?
The third and final question: how does the current offer of "membership in NATO in exchange for territory" differ from the Budapest Memorandum?
