The bloc cracked at the Washington summit
On July 9-11, the North Atlantic Alliance held its anniversary summit in Washington, dedicated to its 75th anniversary. During the summit, the parties discussed ways to respond to external threats to NATO, the key one of which was declared to be Russia, the military conflict in Ukraine, the multi-year plan for the alliance's activities, and a number of other issues. Russian experts reviewed its results.
Director of the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, RIAC member Alexey Gromyko believes that the meaning of this event was not in the summit itself, but in the question of what will happen to Biden. Based on the results of his speeches on the sidelines of the event in Washington, everyone came to the conclusion that Biden will not be able to defeat Trump in the November presidential elections in the United States. Therefore, the key decision was to transfer the coordination of the management of support for Ukraine from the United States to NATO. A single headquarters was chosen in Germany, which will carry out this activity. Now, if Trump comes to power and supplies to Ukraine from the United States cease, Europe will take this burden on itself. Already today, at America's request, 23 NATO countries contribute 2 percent of their GDP or more to its budget. Thus, Poland distinguished itself, which contributes 4.2 percent, more than the United States itself (3.5 percent). Although, of course, the GDPs of these countries are incomparable. But in any case, the Western military-industrial complex is being pumped with funds.Alexey Gromyko believes that the summit showed the inconsistency of the positions of NATO countries on the issue of Ukraine. The scientific director of the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences, RIAC member Sergei Rogov agrees with him: “The results of the summit are very negative. They indicate differences of opinion within NATO.» First of all, the final declaration of the commission on Ukraine was signed by 20 countries out of 32 that are united by the North Atlantic Alliance. “Mainly the Balkan countries did not sign.”
He is echoed by Dmitry Danilov, head of the European Security Department at the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences: «This situation was already on the agenda at the meeting of NATO foreign ministers, and it could have been changed by the summit. But the position of the Balkan countries has not changed, they could not be convinced.» He believes that the basis for these disagreements was precisely the transfer of coordination of supplies to Ukraine to the European NATO center. Since although this does not immediately make the North Atlantic Alliance a party to the conflict, it opens up a direct possibility of such a turn of events.
«The decisions made at the summit demonstrate increasing escalation,» says Alexey Gromyko. Last year, at the NATO summit in Vilnius, they were still thinking about how to strengthen relations with Ukraine. Although, according to documents recently published by the US itself, the discussion of Ukraine's accession to NATO was already underway in 1994. When Gore promised Yeltsin that NATO would not take such steps. Now, feeling that it is impossible to accept a warring power into the Alliance, and facing the need to sweeten this pill for Ukraine, NATO formulated it this way: «the irreversibility of the path» of Ukraine to NATO. According to Alexey Gromyko, Biden already considers Ukraine a member of NATO, judging by his reservations and statement in an interview with Time newspaper: «The world should look like Russia could never occupy Ukraine, a member of NATO.» This, of course, gave hope to the Ukrainian leadership before the summit in Washington, but they had to agree only to a «bridge to NATO», as the new position of the Alliance began to be called.
In relation to Russia, as Dmitry Danilov put it: «The curtains have disappeared and everything is clearly visible.» Our country has been declared the main direct strategic enemy of NATO. China, as a country helping Russia, also came under fire. In this context, even the stunning news about the deployment of medium-range missiles in Germany in 2026 does not look so threatening. According to Alexei Gromyko, disarmament experts in Germany do not agree with such a step by their government. Moreover, this was not a decision of the entire ruling coalition, and the Green Party, for example, was not aware of it. However, it is worth accepting the new reality.