The NATO Summit in Vilnius is a crossroads for the West. Not only is Ukraine’s potential membership on the agenda but so is the potential to widen NATO’s ambit to include nations in the Indo-Pacific, such as Australia. A globally networked NATO, doing what the UN has failed to do, is the world’s best hope for peace.

Let me start by providing some context.

One of the most powerful demonstrations of not just the uselessness but the actual dangers of relying on a UN that is not fit for purpose is encapsulated in the 2001 Slovenian movie No Man’s Land, written and directed by Danis Tanovic, from Bosnia and Herzegovina. The film was acclaimed with 30 awards and a further 25 nominations – including the Best Foreign Language Oscar.

One morning in June 1993, Èiki (Branko Djuriæ), a Bosnian soldier, finds himself in a trench in the middle of no man’s land after a skirmish with Serbs. Two Serb soldiers sent to check out the situation get trapped with him and his wounded buddy Cera (Filip Šovagoviæ). There is no way out without being shot. The Serbs booby trap the wounded Cera so he can’t move. When the younger Serb soldier, Nino (Rene Bitorajac), equalises the standoff with Èiki, he and his former neighbour, now on the opposing side – try to survive amid an insane situation in a hideous war. Journalist Jane Livingstone (Katrin Cartlidge) triggers the involvement of UN peacekeepers led by a well-meaning but frustrated Sgt Marchand (Georges Siatidis) – to little avail.

It is an exemplary film of great economy, emotional power, and humanity, filled with the eternal truths about humanity’s fatal weaknesses. And it’s often hideously funny, exposing the raw truth about mankind; we are as easily motivated by a prick in our pride as by a pistol at our neck. The action takes place over a single, gut-wrenching day. There are not that many bullets fired except in dialogue, but by sunset, we are riddled with angst, consumed by frustration, and saddened by our shortcomings. In desperation, a UN task force is called and arrives. It does nothing. Hopes are dashed. It ends badly.

Two decades later, Jasmina Zbanic’s Oscar-nominated Quo Vadis Aida? tells a similar story of UN impotence, also set on a single day, July 11, 1995, when the Serbian army takes over Aida’s town. An interpreter, she has access to crucial information, but the UN task force is again worse than useless. Hopes are dashed. It ends badly.

These are but two films that emphasise what many in the West know. The UN cannot be relied upon to act as the world’s policeman, especially given that the two greatest threats to peace are nations that are members of the permanent security council with veto powers. The UN can’t halt Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine or China’s threats that hang over Taiwan.

NATO’s options are not proscribed by the chains of China and Russia. Its charter is clear in its determination to protect any member attacked from outside. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine could not have begun had Ukraine been a member.

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky was just 16 when Ukraine agreed to hand over its substantial nuclear arsenal to Russia – yes, the same Russian Federation that is now murdering Zelensky’s countrymen. The deal was this: hand over your nuclear arms – supposedly for destruction – and we’ll sign an agreement that assures Ukraine of security and protection against aggressors. But Ukraine was conned.

The US, the UK, and the Russian Federation signed the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. It has six articles, three of which are directly relevant to Russia’s invasion:

• to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
• to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
• will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.

In our book Zelensky – the Ukrainian Hero Who Defied Putin and United the World, Chris Mcleod and I argue that while one of the signatories, the Russian Federation, broke its word, this does not relieve the other two of their moral obligations. Perhaps relying on a re-energised NATO, or NATO+ with Indo-Pacific characteristics, is a safer bet.

Zelensky – the Ukrainian Hero Who Defied Putin and United the World is available from Wilkinson Publishing.