Russia's national security vs NATO expansion. Part One

    NATO’s leadership is particularly sophisticated in reducing Russia's security
    access_time23 Apr 2022
    print 23 4 2022
     

    To understand the essence of what is happening, it is necessary to turn to the history of the development of relations first between the USSR, and then Russia with the North Atlantic Alliance.

    At first it seemed that the confrontation of the conditional West with the conditional East ended with a draw. Such an assessment could have arisen after the signing of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE Treaty) on November 19, 1990. Two blocs of countries participated in the Treaty – 16 NATO member countries and six Warsaw Treaty Organisation (WTO) countries. The Agreement entered into force on November 9, 1992.

    The Treaty provided for quantitative restrictions on five categories of conventional weapons and equipment available to both groups of states. These categories included: battle tanks (20,000 each); armoured combat vehicles (ACVs, 30,000 each); artillery with a caliber of more than 100 mm (20,000); combat aircraft (7,200); attack helicopters (2,200).

    The Treaty applied to the territory from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains, the Ural rivers and the Caspian Sea. Restrictions were also provided, in particular, on the availability of weapons on the northern and southern flanks of the opposing military-political blocs.

    Then there was the dissolution of the WTO (July 1, 1991) and the collapse of the USSR (December 26, 1991). The restrictions adopted earlier have ceased to satisfy Russia. The main reason was the fact that the Alliance has gained a significant advantage in conventional weapons.

    In 1994, the NATO leadership decided to accept the former republics of the USSR and the WTO countries into the bloc. Already back then it was openly stated (US President Bill Clinton) that this should lead to the alienating Russia.

    To compensate for the imbalance, an Annex to the Final Document of the First CFE Review Conference (Vienna, May 15-31, 1996) was subsequently developed, signed on the initiative of Russia and entered into force on May 15, 1997. This agreement reached an intermediate solution to the problem of flanking restrictions of the CFE Treaty.

    The Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between the Russian Federation and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (also the NATO-Russia Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security) was signed in Paris on May 27, 1997.

    In the context of the article, the following critical provisions should be taken into account. The fourth paragraph of the Act stated that NATO would not deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new members, and would not build storage sites there.

    In addition, the bloc pledged (confirmed) that it would not "carry out its collective defence" by the "additional permanent deployment of substantial combat forces”. It was also pointed out that Russia and NATO will work on an Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (the adapted CFE treaty) and on limits on weapons from the Atlantic to the Urals.

    The revision of the CFE Treaty (the CFE Treaty without an Agreement) was to take place every five years, starting in 2001. The International Agreement on the CFE Treaty was reached on November 19, 1999 at the OSCE Istanbul Summit. It provided for limits on the placement of weapons for each state, which implied ensuring security without taking into account membership in military-political unions. However, if there was a "lag", then it was possible to place the equipment of another state. But, again, not above the set level.

    Shortly before that, on March 12, 1999, Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic were admitted to NATO. This is the so-called "fourth wave" of NATO expansion. The arms imbalance has intensified again in favour of the bloc.

    Then the "fifth wave" passed, the most numerous one. Seven countries – Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Estonia - joined the bloc on March 29, 2004.

    Then there were other "waves". During the sixth one on April 1, 2009, Albania and Croatia joined the bloc. The seventh and eighth expansion occurred at the expense of Montenegro (June 5, 2017) and Northern Macedonia (March 27, 2020), respectively.

    Here is the data for comparison. The NATO quota at the signing of the CFE Treaty was: 19,096 tanks, 31,787 ACVs, 19,529 artillery systems, 7,273 aircraft, 2,282 helicopters. By mid-2007, NATO had: 22,424 tanks, 36,570 ACV, 23,137 artillery systems, 8,038 aircraft, 2,509 helicopters. The growth is quite noticeable.

    The situation had to be corrected. Therefore, on April 26, 2007, Russian President Vladimir Putin, in an address to the Federal Assembly, announced the possibility of declaring a moratorium on the implementation of the CFE Treaty. The reason is that NATO countries have not ratified the CFE Treaty. This was followed by a decree "On the suspension by the Russian Federation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and related international treaties" (July 13, 2007).

    The imbalance in armaments continued to increase. For comparison: by the beginning of 2011, NATO had 18,424 tanks, 22,788 ACVs, 13,264 artillery systems, 3,621 aircraft, 1,085 helicopters. The figures are given without taking into account the armaments of Albania, Latvia, Slovenia and Croatia, which have not joined the CFE Treaty. In the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (Armenia, Belarus, Russia) by the same time there were: 5,239 tanks, 10,100 ACVs, 6,138 artillery systems, 1,686 aircraft and 402 helicopters. The difference is enormous.

    Russia continued to work in the Joint Consultative Group (JCG) on the CFE Treaty to preserve at least some kind of arms control. However, seeing it as "meaninglessness from a political and practical point of view" on March 10, 2015, the Russian Federation announced the suspension of its participation in the meetings of the JCG. The suspension of the CFE Treaty has become complete.

    Throughout the entire duration of the negotiations, Western countries have sabotaged Russian proposals, not responding to the increase in the number of NATO conventional weapons, which was taking place due to the admission of new members. Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic evaded compliance with restrictions on the number of weapons. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia did not participate in the CFE Treaty at all, which allowed them to circumvent all the restriction demands. Also, the bloc did not take into account the increase in US armaments in Bulgaria and Romania.

    And, although the CFE Treaty was suspended, the Russia-NATO Founding Act still continued to operate. A number of participants in the Act have already made attempts to violate this agreement. For example, the issue of non-deployment of "substantial combat forces" on a permanent basis was avoided by placing such forces on a rotational basis.

    Since rotations occur without interruptions, this automatically becomes a permanent placement. Is there a difference between a thousand servicemen with a set of armoured or aviation equipment from the UK compared to the same "set" from the US? There is no difference, and this is obvious.

    Here is, for example, what Nikolay Kobrinets, Director of the Russian Foreign Ministry's Department for Pan-European Cooperation, said in mid-March 2022: "The Founding Act no longer works and the Russian side proceeds from the fact that strengthening the eastern flank of the alliance contradicts it. NATO members have been openly cheating around the term ‘substantial combat forces’ for many years. Their additional contingents in the Baltic states and Poland are formally deployed on a rotational basis, and in fact, on a permanent one, and brought to the level of full readiness."

    In the West, measures were also taken to undermine the Act on a more serious issue – nuclear one. As always, the US acts as thе skirmisher of everything "positive".

    The American leadership began to form public opinion on the issue of the deployment of national nuclear weapons outside the previously established borders in the middle of 2021. In May, disputes between the United States and Germany at the diplomatic level unfolded about the usefulness of American nuclear bombs for the security of Germany. The Germans resisted and defended the opinion that, in a general sense, it was counterproductive, as it jeopardised their national security. At certain moment, the dispute became public.

    On May 15, 2021, the US Ambassador to Germany Richard Grennell spoke on the official Twitter account as follows: in case of Germany's firm refusal to deploy US nuclear weapons, they can be deployed in Poland. After that, the head of our Foreign Ministry, Sergey Lavrov, said that this would be a direct violation of the Russia-NATO Founding Act. Just the part of it that says about preventing the deployment of nuclear weapons on the territory of the new members of the bloc.

    It would seem that they made some noise about and then it was forgotten. But it turned out to be much more serious.

    The Polish leadership seems to have appreciated this idea and, having received such strong patronage, began to act more aggressively, especially after the start of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine. So, on March 15, 2022, during a visit to Kiev, Polish Deputy Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski announced the need to introduce an international military peacekeeping contingent to Ukraine. His idea was subsequently not supported by the top leadership of NATO.

    But the beginning was made. Later, on March 22, 2022, Polish President Andrzej Duda, after a meeting with the Romanian president in Bucharest, said that the Russia-NATO Act, in fact, ceased to exist. The alliance now has one duty - "to defend the free world in the presence of Russia." Therefore, it is necessary to form a new concept of NATO.

    Preparations for Sweden and Finland's accession to NATO have now been stepped up. Future membership is being discussed at various levels. According to Western politicians, the entry of these countries into the Alliance will ensure their security. As always with joy, the British Times newspaper, referring to "sources", clarifies that Sweden and Finland intend to join NATO this summer. It is estimated that we are talking about the upcoming NATO summit in Madrid in June this year. For its part, the Alliance is ready to apply the procedure of accelerated acceptance of new members.

    The notorious Pentagon press secretary John Kirby assured in early April 2022: "There is no planning for the deployment of US forces in Finland and Sweden against the background of talk about the possibility of these states joining NATO." But who would believe such a thing?

    It can be said that the issue of Sweden's joining the bloc has been practically resolved, as it is being actively promoted by the ruling Social Democratic Workers' Party.

    From bad to worse. Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis, at a meeting with his colleague from Iceland on April 8, 2022, said that the Founding Act no longer binds the Alliance, and the new (defence) strategy of NATO will be considered during the Madrid summit.

    Landsbergis, as it seems, had in mind so far the issues of "creating bases and concentrating forces." Iceland's Foreign Minister Thordis Kolbrun Reykfjord Gylfadottir confirmed that she "generally supports the position of the head of Lithuanian democracy”. And here it is unclear when politicians will raise the issue of nuclear weapons.

    It is estimated that the admission of Sweden and Finland to NATO will once again increase the number of conventional weapons in the northern part of the eastern flank of NATO. At the same time, the time is reduced to a minimum and the "operational" space for any strike on a huge area of our territory is expanded to a maximum, including in the case of the use of nuclear weapons.

    Of particular concern is the decrease in the security of the Kaliningrad and Leningrad regions, the transition from the Baltic Sea to the Atlantic Ocean. This is already a supercritical imbalance.

    And, as it is easy to notice, everything is again going by analogy with the history of the Great Patriotic War. Finland is again "hanging" over our northern capital and further over the entire border of the North-Western Federal District up to Murmansk. Well, as we can see, the Alliance’s allies are successfully carrying out the task of "alienating" and "deterring" Russia.

    But they are not the only ones who are so smart and fearless. We also have people who are familiar with the sense of time. That is, they are able to calculate the situation and take appropriate measures to correct it. Naturally, the ever-increasing threat to Russia's national security caused a corresponding reaction from our top military and political leadership.

    Here is a chronology of events related to the security of Russia.

    Russian President Vladimir Putin announced Russia's intention to receive security guarantees on November 18, 2021 at the board of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. The diplomats were tasked with developing and documenting the demands of long–term guarantees to ensure our security.

    According to him, "it is necessary to raise the question of seeking to provide Russia with serious long-term guarantees to ensure our security in this area, because Russia cannot exist and constantly think about what may happen there tomorrow”.

    On December 7, 2021, Vladimir Putin discussed the topic of security guarantees with US President Joe Biden at a videoconference. It was about Russia's interest "in obtaining reliable guarantees that exclude the expansion of NATO in the eastern direction."

    On December 10, a statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation followed, in which, in particular, it was said about the need to intensify the discussion of European security issues.

    On December 15, 2021, the Russian Foreign Ministry handed over to US Deputy Secretary of State Karen Donfried the draft "Treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Security Guarantees and the draft "Agreement on Security Measures of the Russian Federation and the Member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation". The documents were published on the website of the Russian Foreign Ministry on December 17, 2021 (Russia-USA and Russia-NATO).

    As for the US. In eight articles it was proposed:

    to be guided by the principles of cooperation, equal and indivisible security;

    not to use the territory of other states to prepare or carry out an armed attack on Russia or the United States;

    to exclude the expansion of NATO in the eastern direction;

    to refuse admission to the alliance of states that were previously part of the USSR;

    to abandon the creation of military bases on the territory of states that were previously part of the USSR and are not members of NATO;

    to abandon the deployment of forces and means, including nuclear weapons carriers, where such deployment would be perceived by the other side as a threat to its national security;

    to refrain from the activities of various weapons carriers outside the national airspace and territorial waters, from where they can hit targets on the territory of Russia or the United States;

    to abandon the deployment of medium- and shorter-range ground-based missiles and nuclear weapons outside the national territory.

    Concerning NATO, it was proposed:

    to increase transparency and confidence-building measures in the field of military activities, including through the resumption of the work of the Russia-NATO Council;

    to not consider each other as opponents;

    neither Russia nor NATO countries should deploy forces and means on the territory of all other European states in addition to those that were there as of May 27, 1997;

    to exclude the deployment of medium- and shorter-range ground-based missiles in areas from which they are capable of hitting targets on the territory of other participants;

    to stop the expansion of NATO at the expense of other countries, including Ukraine;

    the refusal of NATO from any military activity in Ukraine and other states of Eastern Europe, Transcaucasia and Central Asia.

    It was expected that after studying the materials by the leadership of the United States and NATO, "serious negotiations" would take place. As time has shown, the hopes were in vain.

    During the annual press conference on December 23, 2021, Russian President Vladimir Putin, in response to a corresponding question from a Sky News journalist, said: "You have to give us guarantees, you – and immediately, now, and not to talk round it for decades."

    It is noteworthy that the United States and NATO asked not to publish the answers. I wonder why? What about statements about democracy and freedom? The issues raised in the documents are not at all a laughing matter. Many would like to know what it says. After all, it is not individuals who make agreement but the peoples who delegated these powers to them. And people always want to know the truth. The collective West has managed to behave disgustingly even here.

    However, the "leak" still happened. Scanned full texts of the US’ and NATO’s responses were posted on the website of the Spanish newspaper El País on February 2, 2022. Five pages came from the US and four from NATO. In general terms, none of our proposals became the basis for starting a dialogue. Except for the mere trifle.

    How this whole story ended is already known. However, so far only the story with two "paper" documents and answers to them has ended. The real story continues. Let's go back to Finland and Sweden. While they are considering joining NATO, our leadership continues to assess and respond appropriately to what is happening.

    Recently, Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev also warned: "With the accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO, we will not be able to speak anymore of a nuclear-free status of the Baltic states. The balance must be restored."

    What do these words mean? It's not clear yet. However, Vladimir Putin said earlier that if the United States and NATO refuse to consider Russian proposals in the field of security, a military-technical response will follow, which "may be very various”.

    To be continued...

    Average: 5 (3 votes)