“It is Russia that revived NATO by creating a security threat”

It seems that Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin continues living in another reality created by his state propaganda machine, as Angela Merkel said a few months ago. Since today the whole world, except Putin’s friends and “useful idiots,” is convinced of Russia’s involvement in the crisis in eastern Ukraine. All this – Russian tanks and troops that invaded the territory of Ukraine last week – were registered by both NATO intelligence and foreign journalists.

But Putin persists in blaming the crisis on the West. “A lot of new threats emerge. As you know, a decision on accumulation of NATO forces in Eastern Europe was made recently. The crisis in Ukraine, which in fact was provoked and created by some of our Western partners, is used now to revive this military bloc. All this should undoubtedly be taken into consideration by us and will be considered by me when making decisions on ensuring our country’s security. We will have to do everything to absolutely guarantee this security,” said Russia’s president at the conference on the state program for armaments until 2025.

Everything is distorted here, since NATO’s decision on placement units of the Alliance forces in Eastern European countries on a rotation basis was caused by  Russia’s aggression towards Ukraine. It is aimed at protecting the virtually defenseless NATO allies and it does not threaten Russia’s territorial integrity at all.

The most curious is that at the same conference Putin said that Russia did not intend to engage in an arms race. “Sometimes it seems that some people want to start a new arms race. Of course, we will not become involved in it. This is absolutely out of the question,” said Putin as quoted by RIA Novosti. Remarkably, this statement was voiced after Interfax reported the successful test launch of a new intercontinental ballistic missile Bulava from the strategic missile submarine Vladimir Monomakh.

According to Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy Viktor Chirkov, Russian fleet will “carry out two more missile launches from two missile cruisers equipped with ballistic missiles” in October and November this year. We would like to remind that virtually a prototype of SS-18 Satan intercontinental ballistic missile is meant, which can carry up to 10 hypersonic maneuvering nuclear blocks with individual guidance, able to change the height and direction of flight trajectory and hit targets within an 8,000-kilometer radius. What is it, if not an arms race?

Russia is known to have constantly attributed all its imaginary threats to the Alliance’s eastward expansion, allegedly despite some agreements that NATO would not move an inch towards the USSR. And now all post-Soviet countries joined NATO during the past two decades. This is a choice of those countries to align with this military and political bloc, which for some reason is viewed as a threat in Moscow. It reminds of the Soviet time, when “enemies of the nation” were blamed of any incident, like fires at factories or accidents. And now NATO became such bogey-monster, which the Kremlin’s chief propagandist portrays as a cancer tumor surrounding Russia.

But there is no proof to the effect that Western leaders ever promised the USSR not to expand NATO eastwards. But the Kremlin, which is used to manufacturing a different reality, simply prefers to ignore that, while it should have provided documented proof of this allegation.

Tatiana KASTUEVA-JEAN: “The Russian elite continues thinking in terms of wars of the 19th and 20th centuries, of seizing and controlling territories, drawing in on borders, and influence zones. One of the incentives of Crimea’s annexation was the fear that a NATO base would appear in Crimea one day, instead of the Black Sea Fleet.”

In reality, nothing of the sort was ever mentioned in the correspondence or negotiations of the then USSR leader Mikhail Gorbachev with key Western leaders. For example, this is what the Soviet leader told prime minister of Great Britain Margaret Thatcher on June 8, 1990: “Reforming NATO and the Warsaw Pact and an agreement between them may lead to a situation when any country would be able to join any of these two organizations. Perhaps, somebody will want to join NATO. And what if we, the USSR, will want to join NATO?”

However, the incumbent Russian government continues speculating on this theme abusing the ignorance of Russian citizens. It is obvious that it is always convenient for the government to have a scapegoat and blame it for all troubles instead of working for the good of people, trying to improve their well-being.

Deputy editor-in-chief at The Economist, author of The New Cold War: How the Kremlin Menaces Both Russia and the West Edward LUCAS was traditionally concise and apt in his commentary regarding the latest anti-NATO statements by the Kremlin’s leader. “Russia cannot afford a real arms race with the West. But it can lead an information war, for example, by demonizing NATO and blaming it for this crisis. In reality, it was Russia that revived NATO by creating a new security threat,” the British expert stated.

COMMENTARY

“RUSSIAN ELITE CONTINUES THINKING IN TERMS OF WARS OF THE 19th AND 20th CENTURIES, OF SEIZING AND CONTROLLING TERRITORIES”

Tatiana KASTUEVA-JEAN, head of the Russie.NEI.Visions program, French Institute for International Relations, Paris:

“NATO and its drawing in on Russia’s borders has always been an obsessive fear for Russia and President Putin personally (even though the change in relations began to show in 2007, after the Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation, and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation was signed in Paris in May of 1997 and the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council was created). There are several reasons for that.

“The Russian elite continues thinking in terms of wars of the 19th and 20th centuries, of seizing and controlling territories, drawing in on borders, and influence zones. One of the incentives of Crimea’s annexation was the fear that a NATO base would appear in Crimea one day, instead of the Black Sea Fleet.

“NATO expansion has been viewed as a threat to Russia’s national interests. The prospects of NATO expansion to post-Soviet states has been a red line for the Kremlin, which the West should not have crossed. However, the West understands it perfectly well: after the war with Georgia discussions about this country joining NATO faded away, and today the majority of Western politicians will not support the prospects of Ukraine joining NATO.”

“THE UKRAINIAN CRISIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR NATO TO COME BACK TO THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC MISSIONS ON THE EUROPEAN CONTINENT”

“NATO’s expansion is also a kind of national humiliation for Russia. Unlike NATO, the Warsaw Pact did not survive the Cold War. Russia often says it was promised NATO would not expand towards its borders, and that these promises have been broken. The inability to resist this expansion was perceived like humiliation, and today’s events in many aspects are an answer and revenge to this humiliation.

“Indeed, after the withdrawal of its troops from Afghanistan, NATO seemed to be losing some of its significance, and the Ukrainian crisis is an opportunity for NATO to come back to the original missions on the European continent, gaining a new momentum and receiving increased funding. But not everything is unambiguous even among NATO members themselves. In the conditions of the current crisis, the desire to strengthen NATO and increase its role swelled in the Baltic States and Poland in first place. Meanwhile, large European countries are very cautious about this prospect and are not ready to provide additional funding to increase the role of the Alliance in current circumstances. They are afraid of further degradation of relations with Russia.”

“AN ARMS RACE WOULD MEAN SUICIDE FOR RUSSIA”

“The arms race destroyed the USSR, and I would like to believe Russia learned this lesson. The current state of Russia’s economy will not let it endure such competition. Besides, it would have to be done at the expense of social benefits, pensions, and salaries to state employees, and this could result in popular discontent. Military expenditure in Russia has been steadily increasing in recent years, but it cannot be compared to that of the United States. And when it comes to technologies, Russia seriously lags behind the Western countries: abortive Bulava launches and the inability to set GLONASS in operation prove it. An arms race would mean suicide for Russia.”