In the negotiations between Russia, the United States and NATO on the creation of a new system of global security, the first stage has, perhaps, been completed. Introductory. In December, Russia sent written draft documents to the US and NATO aimed at mutually reducing threats. At the end of January, the Americans and NATO finally sent written responses. They were asked not to publish. Russia agreed. But suddenly flowed from the West.
The Spanish newspaper El País published scans of confidential documents. So everyone learned that the Americans simply ignored Russian concerns. The President drew attention to this during a press conference following the Russian-Hungarian talks Vladimir Putin and once again explained the Russian position to journalists in detail: “Listen to what I say, carefully. After all, in the doctrinal documents of Ukraine itself it is written that they are going to return Crimea, including by military means, not only what they say in public, but in the documents it is written Let’s imagine that Ukraine is a member of NATO: it is stuffed with weapons, there are modern strike systems, as in Poland and Romania, whoever gets in the way, and starts operations in the Crimea, now I’m not even talking about the Donbass. This is a sovereign Russian territory. Question for us in this sense is closed. Let’s imagine that Ukraine is a NATO country and starts these military operations. Should we go to war with the NATO bloc? Has anyone thought about this at least something? It seems not.”
And now let us recall that Russia does not need a world without Russia. And then not only America, but also Europe turns into radioactive ashes. As a response to aggression. So Putin asks: has anyone thought about this at least something? And then he replies: apparently not. Hence the negotiating position. Let’s decide. Don’t chat. Don’t leave. Don’t ignore. Do not violate what has already been agreed and signed.
“Why did we sign treaties, relevant agreements in Istanbul and Astana, where it is written that no country can ensure its security at the expense of the security of others? Here we are saying that the admission of Ukraine to NATO undermines our security, and we ask you to pay attention to this “They talk about the open door policy. Where did it come from? NATO has an open door policy. Where is it spelled out? Nowhere. In article 10 of the treaty of 1949, if my memory serves me right, about the creation of NATO it is written that the Alliance, in agreement with all members and members of NATO can accept other European countries into this organization.Maybe, but not obliged.The same USA, NATO can say, including to Ukraine: we want to ensure your security, we value it, we respect your aspiration, but we do not we can accept you because we have other international obligations that we have already taken on. Why is it incomprehensible or even offensive for Ukraine? The participants of this process: Ukraine, European countries, and Russia,” Putin stressed.
Putin continues to explain tirelessly. All collectively and each individually. Recently, the Russian President spoke in detail by phone: twice with French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi. Vladimir Putin told Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Argentine President Alberto Fernandez and Chinese President Xi Jinping about the Russian position during personal meetings. It is fundamentally important that China now supports the Russian logic of reorganizing the global security system: from the impossibility of ensuring one’s security at the expense of another to the unacceptability of NATO expansion to the East.
What further to expect from the negotiations on global security and is there any chance for the parties to come to a compromise?
In the midst of a search for diplomatic solutions, NATO is clearly demonstrating its essence. A military fist was assembled in the Mediterranean Sea and the Adriatic: at the head is the American nuclear aircraft carrier “Harry Truman” with escort ships, including the flagship of the US 6th Fleet command and staff “Mount Whitney”, which in November plowed the waters of the Black Sea near the Russian borders.
In the air – tanker aircraft, F16 fighters and F18 attack aircraft. It is emphasized that during the exercise called “Neptune Strike” they practice actions at a considerable distance from the aircraft carrier strike group, namely, they fly north – to Poland, Romania and the Baltic countries, which already border Russia. And while the Pentagon said the maneuvers “are not designed for scenarios that could play out in relation to Ukraine,” the Alliance specifically notes that for the first time since the Cold War, the entire American aircraft carrier group was transferred to NATO command. And additional units were transferred to the eastern flank. Unambiguous signals that only reinforce the Alliance’s rejection of Russia’s proposals for security guarantees in Europe given in the written response.
A confidential response from NATO and the United States, which the West wanted to keep secret, was published by the Spanish newspaper El País. Where the leak came from is still unclear, but it is known that the documents are genuine, and the printout was made from a copy sent to Madrid and Kiev. But the main thing is that there is no doubt left: in NATO’s four-page response to Russian proposals for security guarantees, there is not even a hint of compromise. The response from the United States (on 5 pages) nevertheless contains a number of proposals: “The United States is ready to discuss mutual measures to ensure transparency and mutual obligations of both the United States and Russia to limit the deployment of offensive missile systems and permanent forces with a combat mission on the territory of Ukraine.” Also, the United States is not opposed to starting a dialogue on limiting intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles and has offered to conduct inspections at facilities (ABM) in Poland and Romania if Moscow opens access to two of its bases of the US choice.
“It was immediately obvious that the Americans prefer to concentrate on discussing important, but secondary issues in their own way: is it possible to agree on the non-deployment of strike weapons on a reciprocal basis, transparency in the conduct of exercises, measures to prevent unforeseen incidents between combat aircraft, ships? On the key issue , which prompted us to turn to the United States and the North Atlantic Alliance with initiatives, the reaction was negative,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Essentially, Russia’s main demands were ignored – non-expansion of NATO and the return of the bloc’s military infrastructure in Europe to the state of 1997, when the Russia-NATO founding act was signed. At the same time, the West is trying to reduce everything to a discussion of Ukraine. Although there progress is impossible without the implementation of the Minsk agreements. After 7 years of sabotage in Kiev, they now openly say that they are not going to fulfill them: “Implementation of the Minsk agreements means the destruction of the country. When they signed under the barrel of a Russian cannon, and the Germans and the French were watching, it was already clear to all reasonable people that these documents should be implemented impossible”.
In fact, in Kiev they themselves put a gun to their heads when, having unleashed a war with their citizens, they suffered a crushing defeat. The inglorious path is the Southern Cauldron in the summer of 2014 near Marynivka, where more than a thousand Ukrainian soldiers were surrounded. The Debaltsevo cauldron in February 2015, when up to 8,000 military personnel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were surrounded. At the same time, the Maidan authorities were the first to use military force against their citizens.
On June 2, 2014, a Ukrainian attack aircraft attacked the administration building in Lugansk. As a result, 8 people died, almost 3 dozen were injured. At that time, the Kiev media cynically reported that Luhansk citizens blew themselves up with an alleged anti-aircraft missile, which aimed at the air conditioner hanging on the administration building. Petro Poroshenko, who gave orders and eventually capitulated, still enjoys great support from the West and now speaks of Minsk as a mistake: “I personally sat down and wrote the text of the Minsk agreements. Together with Merkel. We wrote together. If we talk about some principled position then the one who does nothing does not err.”
Moscow, in turn, demands from the US and Europe not only to force Kiev to comply with Minsk, but also to fulfill their own obligations, enshrined in the OSCE Istanbul Document of 1999 and the Astana Declaration of 2010. They link the right of countries to choose their own military alliance with obligations not to strengthen their security at the expense of others. The thesis of NATO’s open doors clearly does not fit into this. The topic was discussed during a telephone conversation between the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry and Secretary of State Blinken.
“I confirmed to Secretary of State Blinken that we will not allow this topic to be “rolled up”. We will insist on an honest conversation and an explanation why the West does not want to fulfill its obligations at all or exclusively selectively and in its favor. Anthony Blinken agreed that there is a subject for further discussion. Let’s see how things go. At this stage, we are completing the interdepartmental coordination of proposals received from the United States on other issues. We will report them to our president,” Sergei Lavrov said. For which remains the decision, what will be the response of Russia.