On July 14, Foreign Policy published its biweekly “It’s Debatable” column featuring Scowcroft Center Vice President and Senior Director Matthew Kroenig and Emma Ashford assessing the latest news in international affairs.
In their latest article, Kroenig and Ashford extensively debate the NATO Summit in Vilnius, providing inputs on the Alliance’s communique, Turkey’s decision to support Sweden’s bid for NATO membership, and more. Specifically, the pair debate if an “Israel model” would work for Ukraine.
The Israel model does not make sense for Ukraine. Israel has nuclear weapons. Ukraine does not—anymore. Israel’s enemies do not have nuclear weapons. Ukraine’s enemy does. Washington guarantees Israel a “qualitative military edge” through its dominance of the conventional arms market in the Middle East. It cannot guarantee Ukraine such an edge over Russia.
…the Israel model for Ukraine would effectively be a formalization of what’s happening now, but I would argue that it’s actually more credible as a promise because of that. Biden would commit to maintain a suitable level of support to Ukraine, rather than making a potential future promise to include it in an alliance… I think Ukraine would be wise to focus its efforts there, not on NATO membership.
