Without the victory over Russia, Ukraine will not be admitted to NATO. What was meant by Biden when talking about the end of the war

The condition of Ukraine's accession to NATO US President Biden called the victory of Ukraine in the war. But what did he mean by the victory - the rhetorical question is blogger Roman Komiz - and how should it all work in reality? So, what did Biden mean to say, "NATO will be in the future of Ukraine", answering the question of what conditions the United States is ready to support Ukraine's invitation to NATO members? Biden: "NATO will be in the future of Ukraine.

There are no questions about this. But as we said in Vilnius, Ukraine will become a member of NATO when all allies will agree and the conditions will be fulfilled. But now we need to make sure that they will win the war.

" Should this be understood (Option 1) as three independent conditions where: a) the consent of all NATO members; b) fulfillment of the conditions for Ukraine's accession to NATO; c) the victory of Ukraine in the war? Or this is the other (option 2), which is, in fact, two long -known points, ie (a) and (b), but at the same time, the issue of the issue on these two points cannot be achieved (and, roughly speaking , even no one is going to take them) until "Ukraine does not win war"? That's when it wins (if it wins), then it will be seen .

. . or in fact it means something third (option 3), when there are no points (a) and (b) . . . and more precisely, they are, but how Pure formality, and the main and only point is the fact and the moment when Ukraine "wins the war"? I will not guess which of the variants meant Biden - by their external similarity they are very different - but it is obvious that now (!) The key issues regarding Ukraine's membership in NATO (based on what is said) are the victory of Ukraine in the war.

It is not an abstract "end of the war", not a stop of hostilities as a result of some peace agreement, but "victory".

This is a very important question that does not reveal the US position that it is invested in the concept of victory in this particular case, but perfectly illustrates the position on the impossibility of Ukraine's full membership in NATO, in the sense in which its sovereign territory (in internationally recognized At the moment of the borders!) The provisions of Article 5 of the NATO Statute will be extended, which makes it impossible to enter NATO "in pieces", namely: that is, on the one hand, the good news is that Biden, and in general, officials in the US administration have become To talk about "victory" rather than "not defeat" of Ukraine.

But bad news - without victory there will be no full membership in NATO, although the victory itself depends not only and not so much on the efforts of Ukraine as on the degree of investment in the result . Moreover, from the position of Russian authorities (as it has repeatedly stated), it is not at war with Ukraine, but with NATO . . . And not against Ukraine at all, but against Ukraine to enter NATO . . . Because it does not see the threat in Ukraine, and in NATO, well, etc. D . . . What did Biden mean? . .