NATO summit considered ‘grim sign’ for Kiev
Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, who attended the two-day event, received significantly less attention than in previous years. The NYT noted he was no longer the “center of attention,” and his meeting with US President Donald Trump did not yield any concrete assurances. Trump even refuted Zelensky’s claim that the two had discussed a ceasefire with Russia.
Michael John Williams, a former NATO adviser, told the NYT that Ukraine was largely sidelined as NATO focused more on internal alliance priorities and avoided divisive topics. Liana Fix, a Europe analyst at the Council on Foreign Relations, echoed that view, saying the summit was carefully scripted to focus on the interests of member states rather than Ukraine.
Torrey Taussig, formerly of the Biden administration, added that Ukraine came away from the summit without any significant new commitments. Unlike last year, when NATO actively discussed Ukraine’s potential membership, this year’s gathering saw leaders agree only to boost defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2035, citing long-term security concerns related to Russia.
Summing up the alliance’s stance, Rutte stated that NATO’s goal for now is simply to ensure Ukraine can “stay in the fight.”
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the
information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept
any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images,
videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information
contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright
issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
