The Ukraine's request to join the Atlantic Alliance and its consequences

The actions military tactics of Moscow on the territory of Ukraine, Kiev responds with an action of great political significance, which could be decisive for the fate of the contest, although in the long term. The intention of the Government of Ukraine is to take over the project in 2004, which then-President Viktor Yushchenko had started, for the country's entry into NATO. That accession would break all existing links with Moscow, as the Customs Union, seen by representatives of Kiev as a revival of the Soviet Union, where members give, in fact, part of their sovereignty to the Kremlin. The interruption of this report would put an end also to the claims of Putin to interfere in the internal politics of the country. If the law of NATO membership became law, for Ukraine would also be the end of the formal status of neutrality, which represents the country as a kind of ideal buffer state between the EU, and therefore the West and Russia . The first effect would be the restoration of a geopolitical area of contact between the two spheres of influence, as it was until the fall of the Berlin Wall, with the Atlantic Alliance, immediately adjacent to the Warsaw Pact. But most importantly, and this is the inherent nature of the move in the context of the conflict, would require NATO forces to intervene, since one of its members would be in a position to be under attack by a foreign country. The confirmation of NATO membership is not granted, the acceptance of Ukraine, the Atlantic Alliance would be obliged to intervene: a possibility that Obama steadfastly refuses, as well as Western countries. However, the intention of Ukraine represents a clear choice, Kiev is definitely away from a Russia perceived as too invasive, which is not forgiven the subtraction of the Crimea and the action of continuous disturbance in the struggle with the pro-Russian separatists, supported from Moscow. This step, then should herald accession to the European Union, repeatedly advocated by Western countries, first of all Germany. The future seems to be an expansion, since the limits of Russia's borders, both the EU and NATO. It is not clear what will regret more to Putin, if the subtraction of a possible economic ally or the presence on its borders back of the enemy, that NATO has always been identified with the USA. The decision of Ukraine, it will be brought to completion, because we need to also take into account the internal resistance, it could become a setback for the Kremlin leaders, such as to compromise the its international prestige, even in those areas outside the two blocks that follow the situation ended with the end of the eighties of the last century, just where Putin had tried new international acclaim; while on the floor inside of Russia will not be able to feed that nationalism, sometimes exasperated, which feeds the maintenance of the power of nomenclature which holds the Russian government in office. For global balance will mean a new period of confrontation between east and west, with a dynamic, this time no longer exclusive, but declined in a number of other issues of equal importance and level. For the United States it will be a challenge, but that will no longer be able to conduct yourself, for the many ways in which they are engaged. American diplomacy must be clever enough to involve all allies in a shared management of issues, which will report to NATO, most notably the EU, which will have to find, especially in foreign policy and that of the defense, a synthesis necessary to overcome too different visions, which have hitherto characterized the action. Certainly, for conceiving a purely static EU on economic matters, it will be a revolution and probably judge Ukraine's entry a bad investment.