The role of member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the Russia-Ukraine War has been a frequent topic of discussion recently. Questions remain about whether NATO troops will be deployed to Ukraine to fight against Russia or if Ukraine can use weapons from NATO countries against Russia.
More importantly, there is no consensus within the Western world regarding Ukraine striking Russian territory. The key decision-maker here appears to be the United States (US). Washington still states that it opposes Ukraine using American weapons against Russia.[1] White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby, speaking on the matter, said, “I would tell you that there’s no change to our policy at this point. We don’t encourage or enable the use of U.S.-supplied weapons to strike inside Russia”.[2]
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, on the other hand, states that there is no obstacle to Ukraine attacking Russian territory and that the rules regarding the use of Western-supplied weapons should be relaxed.[3] At this point, a significant policy divergence between the US and NATO regarding Ukraine can be observed. While Washington wants to limit Ukraine’s attacks against Russia, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, in an interview with The Economist on May 24, 2024, called on NATO allies providing weapons to Ukraine to lift the ban on using these weapons to strike military targets in Russia.[4]
In the declaration adopted on May 27, 2024, at the NATO Parliamentary Assembly’s Spring Session in Sofia, with the approval of 24 out of 32 members, it was stated that “Ukraine must be provided with all that it needs, as quickly as possible and for as long as it takes for it to win”.[5] Allied governments have been called upon to “to support Ukraine in its international right to defend itself by lifting some restrictions on the use weapons provided by NATO Allies to strike legitimate targets in Russia”.[6] Stoltenberg emphasized that this was not NATO’s decision but rather the decision of member states that voted positively for the declaration.
During the meeting in Sofia, Stoltenberg stated, “The main purpose of NATO is not to fight the war. The main purpose of NATO is to prevent war, preserve peace”.[7] These views appear to be consistent with the recent Ukrainian policy of the United Kingdom. Indeed, during his visit to Kiev on May 2, 2024, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron stated that Britain would continue its support for Ukraine. He also mentioned that the use of British weapons by Ukraine is at Kiev’s discretion and that it is legitimate for Ukraine to strike Russian territory if deemed necessary.[8] It was emphasized that Russia has the right to register British military guarantees in Ukraine and beyond if such a scenario is implemented.[9]
The issue of whether Ukraine can target Russian assets or use Western weapons in such an attack has also become a topic of debate between the US and the UK. Washington opposes such an attack by Kiev due to the potential risks involved, even if using its own capabilities. London, on the other hand, believes such a strategy to be reasonable, indicating a willingness to further support Kiev. In other words, London leans towards advancing support to Kiev, while Washington is concerned about a potential confrontation between NATO and Russia. Within the US, the Pentagon seems to be the main decision-maker regarding policies concerning Ukraine. This is because the Pentagon’s and the UK’s war strategies have significant influence on the battlefield. In this sense, it could be said that London’s efforts to persuade the White House administration regarding its war strategies in Ukraine are hindered by the Pentagon’s stance. The Pentagon anticipates that such an attack by Ukraine targeting Russian territory could directly threaten US national interests. With its experience from the Cold War era, the Pentagon holds a realistic policy of avoiding a potential military confrontation with Russia.
On the other hand, the UK actively supports the “Peace through Strength” strategy concerning Ukraine. The fundamental plan here is for the West to continue providing military and financial support to Kiev until the best conditions for peace are achieved. In this regard, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron stated, “Peace comes through strength, not through appeasement and weakness”.[10] At this point, how Ukraine can reclaim the territories it has lost control over remains a question mark on the diplomatic table. According to the UK, the most crucial factor that will empower Ukraine at the diplomatic table is its success on the battlefield. This belief of the UK is starting to find resonance within NATO as well. Stoltenberg’s statement, “The main purpose of NATO is not to fight the war. The main purpose of NATO is to prevent war, preserve peace.”[11] is quite similar and compatible with Cameron’s views.
The differences of opinion regarding Ukraine are not limited to the US and the UK. Italy is one of the countries that opposes Stoltenberg’s statements. In relation to this issue, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has stated that Ukraine is against the use of NATO weapons in its attacks against Russia.[12] Taking these views further, Italian Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Transportation Matteo Salvini has stated that Stoltenberg “should apologise, rectify or resign” and added, “He cannot speak for us”.[13]
Another country expressing its views on this matter is the Netherlands. Dutch Defense Minister Kajsa Ollongren emphasized that Ukraine has the right to attack Russian territory, which would fall under legitimate defense. She also noted that this should not actually be a matter of debate within the European Union.[14] EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell, sharing similar views, has stated that Kiev has the right to use Western weapons to attack Russia, saying, “According with the law of war, it is perfectly possible and there is no contradiction”.[15]
In conclusion, the potential use of NATO weapons by Kiev in a possible attack on Russian territory poses significant risks. NATO deployment to Ukraine, the use of weapons from NATO countries for attacks on Russia, Russia’s retaliation, and the subsequent invocation of NATO’s Article 5 could lead to a potential NATO-Russia war. While the US seeks to avoid this risk, the UK and some other European countries argue that it could be possible. Currently, the most reasonable and rational option appears to be opposing the use of NATO weapons by Ukraine to attack Russian territory in order to avoid such risks.
[1] “White House says still opposes Ukraine using US arms against Russia”, Arab News, https://www.arabnews.com/node/2518981/world, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[2] Ibid.
[3] “NATO’s boss wants to free Ukraine to strike hard inside Russia”, Economist, https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/05/24/natos-boss-wants-to-free-ukraine-to-strike-hard-inside-russia, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[4] Ibid.
[5] “NATO PA urges Allies to step up military assistance to Ukraine, lift restrictions on weapons use”, NATO PA, https://www.nato-pa.int/news/nato-pa-urges-allies-step-military-assistance-ukraine-lift-restrictions-weapons-use, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[6] Ibid.
[7] “NATO states call for no red lines on Ukraine’s use of Western weapons”, Euractiv, https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/nato-states-call-for-no-red-lines-on-ukraines-use-of-western-weapons/, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[8] “Russia warns Britain it could strike back after Cameron remark on Ukraine”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-warns-it-can-strike-british-military-targets-after-cameron-remarks-2024-05-06/, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[9] “Zaharova: Londra’nın tehditleri gerçekleşirse İngiltere’nin askeri unsurlarını vurabiliriz”, Sputnik, https://anlatilaninotesi.com.tr/20240507/zaharova-londranin-tehditleri-gerceklesirse-ingilterenin-askeri-unsurlarini-vurabiliriz-1083573065.html, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[10] “UK’s Cameron pitched radical Ukraine peace deal to Trump — report”, Politico, https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-david-cameron-ukraine-peace-deal-mar-a-lago-military-aid/, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[11] “NATO states call for no red lines on Ukraine’s use of Western weapons”, a.g.e., (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[12] “Italy says no to using NATO weapons for Russia strikes”, ANSA, https://www.ansa.it/english/news/politics/2024/05/27/italy-says-no-to-using-nato-weapons-for-russia-strikes_f46c8479-fba4-4826-9149-a86afb2c9199.html, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[13] Ibid.
[14] “Ukraine has right to strike at Russian territory, it’s self-defence – Dutch Defence Ministry”, Ukrinform, https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3868716-ukraine-has-right-to-strike-at-russian-territory-its-selfdefence-dutch-defence-ministry.html, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
[15] “EU Top Diplomat Says Ukraine Has Right To Strike Russian Territory”, The Moscow Times, https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/05/28/eu-top-diplomat-says-ukraine-has-right-to-strike-russian-territory-a85241, (Access Date: 29.05.2024).
