How NATO and Russia quarreled

The North Atlantic Alliance will continue to support Ukraine, but this does not make it a party to the conflict. This statement was made by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in an interview with NBC television. Of course it doesn’t. It’s their opinion, they don’t care about our opinion. And the war of “opinions” did not start today.

Even post-Soviet Russia was treated in NATO only as a “younger brother”. Therefore, now the West is successfully replenishing its cash bins, arming Kyiv, and rubbing its hands that the age-old dream has come true – to push two once fraternal peoples. And, it must be admitted, they did it successfully.

“Partnership for Peace”

The “taming” of the new Russia began during the war in Yugoslavia. Under the sign of “promoting a settlement” in Bosnia, Washington successfully carried out its project of expanding the bloc at the expense of the states of Eastern Europe. In addition, a queue of “partner countries” from the former Warsaw Pact and the Soviet republics has already begun to line up at NATO headquarters in Brussels. It is clear that already with the anti-Russian slogans tried during the years of perestroika. The world was successfully moving towards a unipolar American “world”.

The 60,000th corps of “peacekeepers” from NATO (20,000 from the United States) was thrown into the collapse of Yugoslavia. By the way, then, for decency, the UN diluted the Shtatovites and non-shtatovtsy. Including units of the Russian army. Only 1500 people. If de jure we were, as it were, “brothers in arms”, but de facto our autonomy did not interfere with the principles of NATO’s overall leadership. If we had our own views on the protection of the peaceful Serbian population, then we did not interfere from above with the destruction of a country that was once friendly to us.

The question of separating the opposing sides, in fact, consisted in the split of a once large country into a bunch of small republics. By the way, this scenario can always be tested in any multinational country with a weak central government.

I think someone else remembers the forced march of our paratroopers in Yugoslavia that frightened NATO. Indeed, we got there quickly, but we also got out quickly. And it’s not our guys’ fault. NATO has already patted the new Russian government on the shoulder. Napoleon is said to have liked to tug on his ear in the mood of his marshals. With Tsar Alexander I, it did not work out for him, with the then Russian leaders, NATO did.

So the “Partnership for Peace” programs, sweet for someone, joint Russia-NATO military exercises appeared.

“Adequate answer” remained on paper

So our “partners” moved to the East, condescendingly looking at the Russophobic policy of the Balts and Poles. And later, for the demolition of monuments to Soviet soldiers in these republics. Going back a little, I would like to note that NATO’s barbaric bombardments of Serbian civilians did not prevent us from joining the NATO stall as passive spectators.

The then Minister of Defense Grachev, nevertheless, spoke in a raised voice with the leadership of Brussels, touching on the topic of “NATO expansion.” But the assurances of our friends about the “key role of Russia, the importance of a constant political dialogue,” those close to our powers that be, reaching for bread in the UN, NATO, and later the European Union, smoothed out “our misunderstanding.” Still, there is a certain continuity among our leaders. Grachev, like recently Lavrov, liked to say “give an adequate answer” when we were hit in the face.

The bottom line is that today NATO, with the help of Kyiv, is trying our teeth. And the United States and its allies overlaid the Russian borders to the fullest, like wolf hunters, hanging red flags around. Moreover, we are talking not only about technical or human superiority. The question of the use of nuclear weapons still remains at the “maybe” level.

In one of the NATO documents, the order was given long ago:

“All allies should be prepared to allow the forces of other allies to enter their territory in time of war or crisis and conduct operations there.”

By the way, there is no USSR, but the anti-Russian direction in NATO is still a priority. So, the “Russian threat” is neither in the left, nor in the right, nor in the “pink” or “blue”. Russia has always interfered with those who unleashed wars on the European continent. Even if the instigators are overseas.

Is martial law inevitable?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button