– He can accept losing ground – NRK Urix – Foreign News & Documentaries

The Ukrainian security expert’s suggestion may sound like an echo of the controversial statement made by NATO adviser Stian Jensen during Arendal Week this summer.

There he said:

A: I actually think the most likely solution is for them to give up territory, and then get NATO membership in return.

Orisya Lutsevich is Deputy Head of the Russia Division at the renowned Chatham House think tank.

She puts it this way:

– I can imagine one scenario where the Ukrainians can accept the loss of territory: that we become a member of NATO from the moment we reach an agreement on a cease-fire. It really could have stopped the war.

And she stressed that membership must come immediately, and that there is no room for a process after the cease-fire.

“safety guarantee”

Jensen withdrew his statement after much international attention.

– It came out wrong. He said then: I shouldn’t say it that way.

When NRK asked Lutsevytsj if she agreed with Stian Jenssen in his original statement, she replied:

NATO could stop the war by inviting Ukraine to join it and protect the territories still under Kiev’s control. This is not like what he said. He said for peace. But the Ukrainians want a security guarantee that includes unwavering protection, including from nuclear powers.

Jensen said nothing about the time perspective of a possible operation.

Timing is crucial

Ukrainian people you do not want To exchange land for peace.

The Ukrainian authorities reacted strongly to this proposal.

Land exchange under the umbrella of NATO? It’s ridiculous,” wrote Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Oleg Nikolenko, a spokesman for Ukraine’s foreign ministry, canceled any such discussion “Totally unacceptable.”

NATO: armament is the way to peace

But Ukraine might accept an agreement with Russia if it gets NATO membership right away, Lutsevich believes.

– If the parts of Ukrainian territory temporarily occupied by Russia remain there, while the rest of Ukraine immediately becomes a member of NATO, then I think that may be relevant to Ukraine.

NATO comment on the Scholar’s plan is minimal. Ukraine spokeswoman Oana Lungescu told NRK that it was up to Ukraine to decide when and how the country could achieve lasting peace.

The greater Ukraine’s success on the battlefield, the stronger its position at the negotiating table. Therefore, arms are the path to peace, and NATO is focused on supporting Ukraine as long as it is needed.

– unimaginable

Researcher Lars Peder Haga at the Norwegian Air Force School says the proposal for territory in exchange for NATO membership seems “far-fetched”.

He points out that such a solution requires reaching an agreement between Ukraine and Russia and a harmony agreement between the thirty member states of NATO.

Ukraine and Russia are currently far from negotiations.

Sweden’s accession to NATO took a long time and was difficult.

– So, this seems to me to be a very far-fetched solution now and for the foreseeable future.

At the same time, it is not excluded that the war will end with a cease-fire agreement, according to which Russia will be left with the territories it has occupied, Haga believes.

Because getting them back is very difficult, Haga tells NRK.

He says he believes the war could continue for several years to come.

The funny thing is that once a war has gone on for a long time, it is often more difficult to end it, because both sides have invested and lost so much.

What could be the outcome of the war?

It is likely that the matter will end with a cease-fire agreement. And whether this will be completed with the borders remaining as they are now, or whether the Ukrainians will be able to push the Russians back to the February 24 borders? or a complete exit from all the territories they have occupied since 2014, It’s hard to say.