Can Ukraine be neutral?

A neutral Ukraine, perhaps according to the Swedish or Austrian model? The Russian government brought the idea up in mid-March in one of the rounds of negotiations as a way out of the war. “This is an option that is being discussed and can be seen as a definite compromise,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on March 16.

In the period from its independence in 1990 until 2014, when Russia intervened and occupied Crimea, Ukraine was officially neutral. But after the annexation of Crimea by Russia, the Ukrainian parliament abandoned this policy. In early 2019, she voted by a large majority to change the constitution. Since then, not only membership in the European Union, but also in NATO has been a national goal with constitutional status.

But not only Russia wants to prevent this. NATO itself refuses because it does not want to get involved in a war against Russia. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Selensky, meanwhile, has acknowledged that the goal of joining NATO is probably unattainable.

Neutrality imposed

So can neutrality be an option for Ukraine? Three neutral countries in particular are constantly mentioned as possible models: Austria and Sweden as well as Finland. Everyone has a different story.

At the end of World War II, Austria, like Germany, was conquered by the four victorious powers. The Soviet Union agreed to withdraw only because Austria pledged “permanent neutrality” in an agreement signed in 1955. Leos Müller is a historian at Stockholm University and the author of Neutrality in World History. He writes for DW that in the case of Austria it was “neutrality from above, through a treaty between the great powers”.

Unlike Austria, Sweden chose its own neutrality. He has been in power for more than 200 years, as the country had to hand over to Russia what it was then Finland in the war against Russia in 1809.

Finland itself gained independence in 1917. It was able to maintain this after two wars against the Soviet Union during World War II. “We would not have maintained our sovereignty,” former Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb told DW, “without a self-proclaimed neutrality, pragmatic and not at all ideological.” But “the scope of Finland’s security policy and international decisions was very limited during the Cold War.”

Neutral countries in NATO maneuvers

In all three cases, this neutrality weakened further and further over the following decades. Austria, Finland and Sweden have not yet joined any military alliance, but joined the European Union in 1995. The EU has a common foreign and security policy with military elements. This week alone, EU foreign ministers decided to set up a rapid reaction force of up to 5,000 soldiers.

In particular, the two countries bordering Russia, Sweden and Finland, are seeking military co-operation with NATO. For example, they are taking part in the ongoing “Cold Response” maneuver in northern Norway, hundreds of kilometers from the Russian border. The maneuver was planned long before the war in Ukraine, and Russia was also informed. But now it takes on a different meaning. In June last year, Sweden and Finland also activated themselves: they invited seven NATO countries, including Germany, to the joint “Arctic Challenge 2021” maneuver.

The vast majority in Finland for NATO membership

The war in Ukraine completely changed the situation. Unlike Austria, which lies in the middle of Europe, Sweden and Finland feel “strategically exposed” to Russia, as described by Leos Müller. He cites the long Finnish-Russian border as an excuse, the delicate situation in NATO member countries like Estonia and Latvia with their Russian-speaking minorities, and the well-armed Russian enclave of Kaliningrad on the other side of the Baltic Sea.

What is new is that Sweden and Finland are now intensively discussing whether to give up their neutrality and seek protection from NATO. Then NATO’s obligation to provide assistance would apply to them under Article 5, according to which, an attack on one member is considered an attack on all and all must be defended together.

Former Finnish Prime Minister Stubb believes that Finland will “finally” join NATO. “It is not a question of whether he will join them, but when.” He expects a Finnish application “for several months”. According to recent polls, 62% of Finns are now in favor of membership, compared to only 16% against. “The train started from the station,” says Stubb. “The last stop will be NATO headquarters.” German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has already said that if Finland asked NATO, it would be “very welcome”.

Leos Müller in Stockholm is more cautious. After all, in Sweden there is now a relative majority of 35 to 41 percent in favor of accession. In the Swedish parliamentary elections in September, the issue of NATO membership will be one of the most important topics. Things have changed a lot since the outbreak of the war, says Müller. He believes that “if the two countries are to unite, then together, in coordination.”

Demilitarization would be “unimaginable for a neutral country”

These two countries, which may relinquish their neutrality because of the Russian threat, are no longer a viable model for Ukraine as well. So far there have been no comparable movements in Austria. But Austria is geostrategically in a different position.

But no matter which example you use, Leos Müller believes that neutrality would not work for Ukraine: other states or organizations, such as the US, Russia or NATO, would have to guarantee this neutrality and defend Ukraine in the event of an attack. “But this requires the functioning of international law, agreements and functional organizations. “And today Russia is violating all these agreements and organizations.” In addition, Russia is demanding a “demilitarization” of Ukraine – “an unimaginable demand for a neutral country,” says Müller. Like Sweden or Switzerland, Ukraine needs defense capabilities.

Ukraine has already seen that international guarantees can ultimately be worthless. In 1994, in the Budapest Memorandum, she vowed to give up the nuclear weapons she had inherited after the collapse of the Soviet Union. In return, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom undertook to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and borders. 20 years later, Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimea, and the two Western powers allowed it.

Condition as in 1914

Both Swedish historian Müller and former Finnish Prime Minister Stubb see the war in Ukraine as a dramatic turning point. “Putin’s war is currently destroying the world order after 1945,” said Leos Müller.

Alexander Stubb adds: “For me this moment is like that of 1914, 1939 or 1989.” After the Iron Curtain of the Cold War, there will now be a new curtain in Europe and “Russia will be completely isolated.” Of course at some point you will have to deal with Russia again. “But for me as a Finn it is a dramatic realization that we will probably have no contact with our neighbors with our 1340 km long border indefinitely.”

If Finland relinquishes its neutrality and becomes a member of NATO, Russia and the Western alliance will be head to head on this long border in northern Europe.

top channel