On Tuesday, five unnamed diplomats told the Reuters news service that NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg is expected to propose that the NATO alliance approve a €500 billion (Euro) military aid package for Ukraine for support in that eastern European nation’s ongoing war with invading Russia.
Under the plan, NATO would take over some coordination work from a U.S.-led ad-hoc coalition known as the Ramstein group – a step designed in part to guard against any cut in U.S. support if Donald Trump returns to the White House, diplomats said.
The proposal is expected to be discussed at a two-day meeting of NATO foreign ministers on Wednesday and Thursday, with the aim of finalising a package in time for a NATO summit in Washington in July.
Until now, NATO as an organisation has restricted itself to non-lethal aid for Ukraine out of fears that a more direct role could trigger an escalation of tensions with Russia. Most of its members provide weapons to Ukraine on a bilateral basis.
This would appear to be a sea change in the way NATO (of which we must remember that the United States is a key member) is approaching the Russia-Ukrainian war.
Previously on RedState: Speaker Johnson Confirms the $96 Billion Israel-Taiwan-Ukraine Aid Bill Will Get a Vote Very Soon
Putin’s War, Week 109. Russian Offensive Jammed Up While Ukraine Funding Logjam Breaks
Indeed, any direct military aid from NATO is inclined to be taken personally by Tsar Vladimir I in Moscow.
But diplomats said there was a growing view within NATO that the time had come to put military aid to Ukraine on a more sustainable, long-term footing and the Western alliance was best placed to take on much of that role.
Some also said that threats by Russian President Vladimir Putin that he would regard various steps taken by NATO allies as escalatory had not led to retaliatory action against them.
This statement, of course, begs another question: Putting this aid on a “more sustainable, long-term footing” makes one wonder, “How long?” The latest Russian offensive has once again bogged down, and this NATO proposal is also seen as a hedge against a possible (likely) incoming Trump administration that may be less sanguine about sending an unending stream of billion-dollar checks to Kyiv.
Diplomats cautioned that discussions on the proposal were at an early stage and it was unclear whether the 100 billion euro total would be accepted or how it would be financed. All NATO decisions require consensus among the alliance’s 32 members.
“It goes some way to protecting in case of Trump. But it is impossible to create something Trump-proof,” said another diplomat.
From this, we can conclude that NATO thinks that the Russia-Ukraine conflict will last not only until the U.S. presidential inauguration in January 2025 but possibly until the end of a second Trump term in January 2029. If that is NATO’s presumption, that’s rather callous and horrifying, that this enormous drain of blood and fortune would continue for five more years.
While seeing Europe step up to solving some of Europe’s problems is a welcome change, it’s important to note that the United States and Germany are far and away the largest sources of direct funding for NATO, the two nations tied at picking up a little over 16 percent of the total; the United Kingdom is in a distant third with 11.2 percent, more or less. So even with this being an official NATO resolution, if it happens, as with all NATO expenditures, the United States taxpayers are still on the hook for a large portion of the total.
So far, this is just a proposal. RedState will continue to watch this issue and update you as events warrant.
