Under NATO’s 1949 founding treaty, decisions on enlargement are made “by unanimous agreement,” meaning that Fico’s opposition to Ukraine joining the alliance could indeed block its membership at least until the end of the Slovak leader’s current term in power in 2027. Other Russia-friendly NATO members could also seek to frustrate Ukraine’s membership aspirations.
A proxy war would be imply that neither the US nor Russia are involved in the Russian invasion of Ukraine on a direct military basis. As that’s not the case in this context, while the conflict has some similarities to a proxy war in terms of pitting the resources of the West against those of Russia, financially sustained by its trade deals with Iran, India, and China, it is a gross mischaracterization to even imply that neither size is more to blame than the other in the conflict when all Russia needs to do to end the war, financial restitutions aside, is simply return to Ukraine all of its stolen lands and kidnapped citizens.
I mean, technically speaking and using a rather lax definition, this is a proxy war between north and South Korea - also one between Israel and Iran, and between USA and China.
We’re on the same side, but I find the notion of Russia being the proxy instead of the major power to be very funny, so for what I’m concerned I’m ok with calling it a proxy war - as long as we get the countries right.
Also, fuck fico and his Slovakia. As a former nazi and then soviet puppet they should know better.
On the subject of Slovakia, I agree to an extent. They were pushed to give Germany land in the late 1930s due to the Munich Agreement, which gave Nazis a foothold in the country itself. However, they quickly surrendered the rest of the country when the nazis said “Let’s have it”