Follow us on social

Original

Russia relations sour as Austin floats Georgia, Ukraine NATO membership

The latest tit-for-tat comes amid signs of warming relations.

Analysis | Europe

Despite recent hopeful signs of warming U.S.-Russia relations, Russia suspended its NATO mission on Monday in response to NATO expelling eight of the Russian mission’s diplomats for alleged spying. The episode came one day after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said  “there is an open door to NATO” for both Georgia and Ukraine, something experts say would be needlessly antagonistic toward Moscow.

To deal with any emergencies after this week’s incident, the Russians suggested the two sides communicate via their embassy in Brussels. But Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that NATO has long ago “buried the key rule [of cooperation] of the Russia-NATO council with their own hands.”

The council was created in 2002 during the brief era of hope for NATO-Russia cooperation but Russia’s annexation of Crimea largely put an end to that and the council has met only sporadically since. 

Referring to the news this week, Milan Czerny, a researcher of Russian foreign policy at the University of Oxford, told the Responsible Statecraft that “in itself the end of the Russian delegation is not very meaningful. But it is symbolic of an important broader trend that is deterioration of ties between the U.S. and Russia.”

Many experts link this deterioration in part to NATO expansion. Russia officially considers NATO to be a national security threat. Georgia and Ukraine both saw a Russia-backed insurgency when the Kremlin became concerned at the prospect of each joining NATO back in 2008 and 2014. 

Ben Friedman, Policy Director at Defense Priorities, called Austin’s statement hypocritical.

“Ukraine needs to cut a deal with Russia,” he said. “The U.S. dangling the NATO prospect in front of Ukraine prevents Ukraine from having a working foreign policy towards its main issue.”

Friedman, who has argued against Ukraine’s NATO membership, called Austin’s suggestion a “bad idea” because both Ukraine and Georgia have territorial conflicts with Russia. 

“They would be very hard to defend while offering almost no benefit. It’s a loser for a cost-benefit analysis,” he said, adding that “the territorial integrity of Georgia and Ukraine is not related to U.S. security” while Russia has a “strong historical interest” in these countries, especially in Ukraine. 

During a briefing with the Ukrainian minister of defense on Tuesday, Secretary Austin said “no third country” — meaning Russia — “can veto Ukraine's accession to NATO.” However, NATO members can veto new accessions and European allies don’t seem keen on Ukraine’s membership. French Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs Jean-Yves Le Drian said in June that France believes "that for the moment the conditions [for Ukraine’s membership] are not met." 

Regarding Austin’s comments on potential NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine, Friedman believes that the United States has “lost the ability to differentiate between the countries it supports diplomatically and those it would fight a war for.” 

“I think this is something that Washington needs to get over,” he said. “We need to get back into the habit of thinking more clearly about alliances.” 


U.S. Northern Command personnel move medical supplies for distribution at New York's Javits Medical Station as part of the U.S. military's COVID-19 response (U.S. Army Photo by Pvt. 1st Class Nathaniel Gayle)
Analysis | Europe
'Security guarantees' dominate talks but remain undefined
Top photo credit: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy speaks during a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump, French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, and Finland's President Alexander Stubb amid negotiations to end the Russian war in Ukraine, at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., August 18, 2025. REUTERS/Al Drago

'Security guarantees' dominate talks but remain undefined

Europe

President Donald Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and a host of European leaders in the White House Monday to discuss a framework for a deal to end the war. The big takeaway: that all parties appear to agree that the U.S. and Europe would provide some sort of postwar security guarantees to deter another Russian invasion.

What that might look like is still undefined. Trump also suggested an agreement would require “possible exchanges of territory” and consider the “war lines” between Ukraine and Russia, though this issue did not appear to take center stage Monday. Furthermore, Trump said there could be a future “trilateral” meeting set for the leaders of the U.S., Ukraine, and Russia, and reportedly interrupted the afternoon meeting with the European leaders to speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the phone.

keep readingShow less
Zelensky White House Keith Kellogg
Top photo credit: Handout - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, speaks with U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Ukraine, Ret. General Keith Kellogg prior to their meeting, August 18, 2025 in Washington, D.C. Zelenskyy met with Kellogg before the planned meeting with President Donald Trump later in the day. Photo by Ukrainian Presidential Press Office via ABACAPRESS.COM

Zelensky White House meeting could spell end of the war

Europe

If Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky cannot agree in principle with the contours of a peace deal mapped out by President Trump, then the war will continue into 2026. I’d encourage him to take the deal, even if it may cause him to lose power.

The stakes couldn’t be higher ahead of the showdown in the Oval Office today between President Donald Trump and President Zelensky, supported by EU leaders and the Secretary General of NATO.

keep readingShow less
Congo Rwanda peace
Top image credit: FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting with Democratic Republic of the Congo's Foreign Minister Therese Kayikwamba Wagner and Rwanda's Foreign Minister Olivier Nduhungirehe in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington D.C., June 27, 2025. REUTERS/Ken Cedeno/File Photo

US companies rush into Congo before ink is dry on peace deal

Africa

On June 27, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Rwanda signed a peace agreement in Washington, brokered by the United States. About a month later, on August 1, they agreed to a Regional Economic Integration Framework — another U.S.-brokered initiative linking the peace process to cross-border economic cooperation.

All of this has been heralded as a “historic turning point” that could end years of conflict in eastern Congo between the M23 rebel movement, backed by Rwanda, and the Congolese state.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.