Michael Roth, the chair of the Bundestag’s Foreign Policy Committee, suggested that Ukraine might be admitted to NATO in a limited way. He expressed this view in an interview with the German newspaper Die Zeit. The interview explored a nuanced path toward Ukraine’s alliance membership without presenting a full, immediate invitation.
Roth proposed an interpretation of the NATO accession framework that would not demand an ideal, fully stabilized Ukraine before entry. He suggested that areas of Ukraine under Kyiv’s control could be designated as part of NATO territory right away, with the alliance’s Article 5 protection applying to those regions only. He emphasized that the rest of Ukraine would not be covered by the same guarantee, noting that the ultimate peaceful solution should be determined by events on the ground. He stressed that this approach could be a consideration even by the Kremlin, should it choose to engage with the idea.
He described the coming period as decisive for Ukraine and urged NATO to send a clear signal to Kyiv about its future path. Without consensus, he warned, Ukraine’s entry might be postponed until a later moment. Roth highlighted that while NATO’s charter traditionally prioritizes states ready to meet the requirements for membership, the current security environment has created a gray zone that is dangerous for Ukraine. He argued for a concrete roadmap detailing when and how Ukraine could join, should consensus fail to emerge on a direct invitation. He criticized the ongoing diplomatic ambiguity as a significant strategic problem not only for Ukraine but for European security as a whole.
Roth argued that Europe must prepare to deter and defend more effectively against Russia. He voiced strong support for extending NATO’s perspective to Ukraine but cautioned against simplistic notions of ending Russian aggression with a single policy move. He warned that an automatic timetable that would declare Russia a temporary obstacle in exchange for a future NATO rush would be irresponsible, especially after the uncertainties following the rebel uprising in Russia. He also noted that the current year would be critical for Ukraine, urging robust support across military, financial, and political dimensions to help Kyiv sustain its sovereignty.
Roth proposed a rapid reconstruction plan akin to a Marshall Plan to rebuild Ukraine and strengthen its defenses, alongside deeper integration with Europe, including the European Union. He advocated binding commitments to deliver advanced Western weapons systems for years and argued that sustained aid would counter Russia’s expectations that Western support would wane. He affirmed a continued commitment to NATO membership for Ukraine into the future.
In Washington, White House officials said that any path for Ukraine to join NATO would require reforms to meet the alliance’s standards. They reiterated the United States’ support for NATO’s open-door policy while underscoring that Kyiv must fulfill the same criteria as other member states. The officials emphasized that Ukraine’s accession would be contingent on meeting established standards, a process viewed through the lens of ongoing alliance cohesion. The United States remains engaged with the alliance on Ukraine policy and its open-door commitments, according to official statements.
Looking ahead, the next NATO summit is scheduled for mid-July in Vilnius. Ukrainian foreign authorities have signaled that Kyiv will not settle for anything less than an invitation to join the alliance. They have stressed that if Vilnius endorses only an open-door approach without concrete steps toward membership, the outcome would be unacceptable. The Ukrainian leadership has urged NATO to take decisive steps regarding Ukraine’s security guarantees between now and formal membership. Historical context notes that discussions about Ukraine’s membership began long ago, with earlier summits considering membership prospects and various reforms enacted by Kyiv. Over time, Ukraine has pursued closer ties with Western institutions, moving from non-alignment to active engagement with European and transatlantic partnerships. The broader goal remains clear: to secure guarantees and a credible pathway toward membership, while Kyiv continues to strengthen its sovereignty and defense capabilities. Next steps and timelines will be central themes for Vilnius and beyond, as the alliance balances openness with the need to maintain unity among member states and partners in the face of ongoing security challenges .