I'm not exactly an expert in geopolitics, but I will give it my best attempt.Can I ask a really simplistic question? Mind you I’m just a mom of a SA kid and midsib and have no geopolitical education or military experience.
I don’t see how bringing Ukraine into NATO would ever have benefited NATO. As I understand it, to bring a country in, all member countries must have some benefit.
Ukraine would be one step too close to Putin’s beloved Mother Russia and the buffer zone of Ukraine would be gone. Conversely, if he raised a pinky against Ukraine all NATO nations would then be obligated by Article 5 to act. Keeping Ukraine out keeps NATO more protected as a whole, at least from going toe to toe with a massive nuclear power with a billionaire oligarch with his hand on the launch codes.
Why didn’t we just say Ukraine becoming a member nation was a no go. A hard no go. Would that have helped? We have had months, months to try that tact and we didn’t. It boggles my mind.
Open to some polite schooling.
One interpretation of why it would benefit NATO to allow Ukraine to join is rather simple. If it is assumed that Putin (who has shown all signs he intends to massively expand the Russian sphere of influence through military force, if necessary) was already planning on slowly destroying the more-Western friendly relatively democratic government of Ukraine, then it makes sense from a strategic perspective to counter Putin in his goal to prevent him from gaining power and victory. Making Ukraine a NATO member would undoubtedly cause blowback from Russia, but the threat of nuclear war and/or a conventional war could force Putin to back down. If this could be accomplished it would be an undoubted setback for Putin, showcasing his weakness to all of Russia, and a massive victory for NATO proving that it could successfully force Russia to back down. Now that is admittedly a best-case scenario and a highly hypothetical one at that. NATO previously stood as the opposition to Soviet influence in Europe and is now the inheritor of the Soviet legacy is Russia. It is not exactly a stretch to claim that NATO's purpose was/is to counter Russian influence.
As for conceding to Russian demands regarding NATO membership of Ukraine? Ukraine has consistently shown interest in NATO membership but has effectively been denied. This has been for various reasons from my understanding, and denying Ukraine membership based simply on Putin's demands could set a poor precedent. Putin's list of demands strikes me as more of a Munich Diktat. Little more than a power grab with flimsy excuses being used to justify the war. Putin has also said he is leading this war to "denazify" Ukraine, a democratic country led by a Jewish President. And that's not even considering the damage the Einsatzgruppen and other Nazi forces did to Ukraine during Operation Barbarossa and beyond. All of this is to say, giving in to Russian demands may simply have caused more excuses to be made and the war may have happened anyway.
Note: this is just my hastily written opinion. I apologize for the lack of sourcing and possible errors. When I have more time I'll do my best to get some sources to back up some of my claims. Hopefully, this helps.
Last edited: