Finally, the move could easily embolden Putin and strengthen him domestically. Russian military incursions in its near abroad are motivated by a variety of factors, but high among them is Putin’s project to remain politically well situated through his 2024 term limits. By annexing Crimea, Putin has harnessed Russian nationalism to a new degree, launching his approval ratings above 80 percent. NATO enlargement does nothing to interdict this payoff for Putin and, as such, is unlikely to substantially change his calculus with respect to operations in Crimea, Ukraine and potentially elsewhere. Indeed, NATO enlargement would provide Putin with more fodder to craft a Cold War-lite narrative to justify authoritarian rule.

For now, it’s clear that NATO enlargement entails severe national-security risks. But what payoffs could realistically be expected from such a broad, bludgeon-like move? And in answering that question, has the West exhausted its supply of scalpels? As the NATO Summit approaches this September, these are the questions that should occupy transatlantic policy makers as they consider European stability and security.

Bill French is a policy analyst at the National Security Network. Follow him at @BillyBobFrench.