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.
Good effort but they were never actually getting the carrot. Just the stick. Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, or Estonia could literally eat a tactical nuke without a strategic response from NATO. They openly break their own agreements to hide their unwillingness to tread further across Russia’s red lines. They will poke and prod from a distance, but not enough to do more than make the Russians fear and suffer a bit. The same is true of Iran. The global south rivals picked out by the US are growing & further modernizing their industrial base faster than the US can arrest that growth. The west itself is too bogged down by imports and the labor costs from debt housing and inflation etcetera to get financiers to expand industry. Military production is not able to keep up with the Russian front alone, but with the Middle East getting hotter it is making war with China a silly prospect. If Yemen’s anti-ship missiles offend our aircraft carriers just imagine what the PLA is going to be capable of with their industrial production. The good thing is nobody wants that, yikes.
Anyways Ukraine was never joining NATO as that would create too much risk for the US, which wanted to pressure Russia into economic collapse and regime change via sanctions. They never had a realistic plan to win on the battlefield.