Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Analysis
    • Research
    • Q&A
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / NATO / The NATO–Ukraine situationship
NATO, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine, Ukraine‑Russia

July 27, 2023

The NATO–Ukraine situationship

By Daniel DePetris

During a November 2019 interview with the Economist, French president Emmanuel Macron had some choice words about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The oldest alliance in history, Macron said, was at risk of imploding because of Turkish malfeasance, the lack of planning between NATO and the United States, its most important member, and a Europe that has been content with outsourcing its security responsibilities to Washington. “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO,” Macron declared. The words got the entire continent in a tizzy; even Donald Trump, no lover of NATO, scolded Macron for his “very insulting” remark.

Fast-forward three and a half years, and the situation is markedly different. Europe is seeing its worst conflict in almost eight decades. Upwards of 300,000 Russian troops are in Ukraine, trying to fend off a Ukrainian counteroffensive at multiple points along the 600-mile-long front line. Vladimir Putin, the Russian despot who was frequently perceived to be a master strategist and expert opportunist, has exposed himself to be an ordinary man susceptible to poor assumptions, poorer planning, and mutinous mercenaries. NATO, it seems, has awakened from its deep multi-decade slumber. “In December 2019, I had harsh words for NATO,” Macron told a security conference in Slovakia in May. “I could say today that Vladimir Putin has revived it with the worst of electroshocks.”

On the surface, that certainly appears to be the case. Between the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, NATO was a massive bureaucratic organization in search of a mission. Europe was united and largely at peace, the Soviet Union was no more, and the Russia that emerged from its embers had spent nearly a decade dealing with crime, geopolitical weakness, and economic calamity. The observation of former senator Richard Lugar (R., Ind.) in 1993 that NATO needed to go “out of area or out of business” was taken as gospel in Washington during the 1990s, and nobody in a position of power was contemplating the latter option. With the exception of George Kennan, architect of the U.S. containment policy against the Soviet Union, no one seriously questioned the policy of enlarging NATO into the former Warsaw Pact countries.

Read at National Review

Author

Photo of Daniel DePetris

Daniel
DePetris

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Europe

Op-edNuclear weapons, Europe and Eurasia, Russia

Russia Is Offering An Informal Nuclear Deal. Washington Should Take It.

By John Grover

February 25, 2026

Op-edNATO, Alliances, Europe and Eurasia

Breaking Europe’s Trans-Atlantic Habit: The End of the Senior Partner Myth

By Moritz Graefrath

February 24, 2026

Op-edNATO, Alliances, Ukraine‑Russia

Europe debates the bomb

By Daniel DePetris

February 19, 2026

Op-edNATO, Alliances, Europe and Eurasia

Marco Rubio’s Munich speech was an ultimatum to Europe

By Jennifer Kavanagh

February 15, 2026

Op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine

Ukraine and Russia are both suffering as the war enters its fifth year

By Daniel DePetris

February 10, 2026

Op-edGrand strategy, Greenland, NATO, Western Hemisphere

Donald Trump is endangering U.S. alliances

By Christopher McCallion

January 30, 2026

Events on NATO

See All Events
virtualNATO, Alliances, Burden sharing, Europe and Eurasia, Grand strategy

Assessing the 2026 NDS: Will it usher in burden shifting?

February 9, 2026
virtualNATO, Alliances, Europe and Eurasia, Russia, Ukraine, Ukraine‑Russia

A ‘bridge’ to NATO or false hope for Ukraine?

July 12, 2024
virtualNATO, Alliances, Deterrence, Europe and Eurasia, Nuclear weapons

New York for Paris? NATO and extended deterrence in a new nuclear age

July 2, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • Research
  • Experts
  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.