If Donald Trump wins this November, with Ohio Senator JD Vance as his VP,Ukraine’s hopes of joining NATO could vanish — and that wouldn’t be a bad outcome. Given Ukraine’s minimal economic and strategic relevance to United States national interests, it’s not worth expanding a security umbrella that would risk potential world war.
During the 2024 NATO summit held recently in Washington D.C., leaders of the alliance stated that Ukraine is on an “irreversible path” into the already immense, 32-nation-state alliance. Yet, a crucial question remains largely unasked: How does the U.S. benefit from Ukraine joining NATO? Not only does Ukraine lack relevance to U.S. national interests, but its acceptance into the alliance could actively undermine those interests.
Critics have (sometimes intentionally) misconstrued previous arguments against including Ukraine in NATO as “Putin talking points.” This could not be further from the truth. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was unjust and had no legal standing. Nevertheless, the U.S. should still oppose Ukraine joining the alliance. Ukraine has little relevance to U.S. economic and security interests, and its inclusion could edge the world closer to a global war. In 2021, only 0.1% of total U.S. exports went to Ukraine, and 0.1% of imports came from Ukraine, according to the Office of Technology Evaluation. Regarding security, Ukraine’s geographic position isn’t significant enough to justify extending NATO’s security umbrella, as outlined in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which treats an attack on one member as an attack on all. Ukraine’s acceptance into NATO would undercut U.S. national interests and jeopardize the efforts of those seeking to avoid a broader war with Russia.
Russia and Ukraine have deeply rooted historical, cultural, economic, and political ties. This kinship of sorts makes the prospect of accepting Ukraine into NATO inherently murky as the alliance strongly opposes Russia. Allies of the treaty organization purport they pose no threat to Russia, which they themselves may very well believe, but since the organization’s inception, the alliance has opposed the Soviet Union, now Russia. During the July Crisis of 1914, Russian Tsar Nicholas II and his cousin, German Kaiser Wilhelm II, exchanged private telegrams known as the ‘Willy-Nicky’ correspondence, where they expressed a mutual desire to avoid war, but their efforts were ultimately unsuccessful. In the face of broader geopolitical challenges, stated desires of world leaders are not enough to avoid catastrophe. Instead, leaders need to avoid the circumstances that increase the likelihood of war, such as inducting Ukraine into a military alliance, which Russian President Vladimir Putin states is a red line for him and the state of Russia.
As turbulent times lie ahead, it is paramount that our nation’s leaders prioritize actions that will bring the world closer to peace and draw us further away from the brink of destruction. This includes stopping Ukraine from joining NATO. On the eve of WWI, British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey famously said, “The lamps are going out all over Europe; we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime.” Grey knew the calamity that was waiting ahead for his people. We can avoid such a fate, learning from the past and pressuring our nation’s leaders to develop roadmaps that foster world peace, not world wars.
Daniel Corcoran is currently a contributor with Young Voices who also hosts a personal podcast Overcoming the Divide, which focuses on mending political fractures through conversation, civil discourse, and featuring a wide variety of viewpoints. He earned a BA in International Politics at Penn State University.
