In May 1997, NATO and Russia signed the Founding Act on Relationship, Cooperation and Security. The document required the Russian Federation to participate in the EAPC (Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council) and the Partnership for Peace program, as well as to provide the alliance with information on military doctrine, budget and military strategy. In turn, NATO undertook not to place nuclear weapons on the territory of the new members of the alliance and not to equip places for their storage. Both sides also pledged not to consider each other as a military adversary and to respect the territorial integrity of states.
In March of this year, the president of Poland, famous for its extreme Russophobia, Andrzej Duda declared that this Founding Act “no longer exists” and does not bind anyone. In April, the head of the British Foreign Office spoke in the same vein Liz Trussnoting that the Russia-NATO Founding Act of 1997 does not correspond to the current situation in the world and its days are over. In early May, the head of the military committee of the alliance Robert Bauer stressed that the provisions of this act do not in any way impede the expansion of NATO’s military presence in Eastern Europe.
The last “icing on the cake” on this occasion was the statement of the Deputy Head of NATO Secretary General Mirchi Joan.
“They are [россияне] made decisions, they made commitments [в Основополагающем акте Россия — НАТО] not to attack the neighbors, which they do, and to hold regular consultations with NATO, which they do not do … Therefore, I think that in fact this Founding Act is essentially not valid because of Russia, ”he said the other day to the oldest in world news agency France-Press (quote from RIA Novosti).
Thus, Joané concluded, at the moment NATO has every right to strengthen its position on the eastern flank and “guarantee that every square inch of NATO territory” will be protected in accordance with Article 5 of the Alliance Charter, as well as by its allies.
Speaking about the fact that it was Russia that became the “malicious violator” of the Founding Act on Cooperation between Russia and the North Atlantic Alliance, the NATO functionary is actually notoriously cunning, and this is still very mildly said.
Wasn’t NATO initiated in 2004 an operation to patrol the airspace of the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland) with its own Air Force, and Romania – the sky over the Balkans?
“In the course of these round-the-clock and year-round operations,” said “SP” Corresponding Member of the Academy of Military Sciences of Russia, Member of the Scientific Council of the National Institute for Global Security Studies Vladimir Kozin, – NATO dual-purpose aircraft capable of carrying nuclear bombs are involved. Since the beginning of the Russian special operation in Ukraine, their number has been increased. According to data in open sources, 5 times. Moreover, due to the additional deployment of modern American fifth-generation fighter-bombers F-35A, certified for the delivery of nuclear weapons. Moreover, the United States overtook 8 B-52H heavy bombers to Europe.
In addition, he noted, the combat readiness of US ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles is 99%, American submarine missile carriers with strategic nuclear missiles on alert in the oceans are 100%, as well as the combat readiness of American strategic heavy aircraft, which was deployed in Great Britain and the Czech Republic even before the barbaric aggression of Kyiv against the republics of Donbass.
Against this background, do the current words of formally the second person in the leadership of the North Atlantic Alliance about the “right” of NATO to strengthen its eastern flanks and “protect every inch of the territory” of the alliance mean that the military bloc, which carried out such a long military training, nevertheless decided to switch to aggressive anti-Russian actions under the guise of Jesuit demagogic casuistry?
“NATO officials have already said so much that the question arises about their professional competence or checking with a psychiatrist,” he shared his conclusions on this matter with “SP” independent expert on information warfare, geopolitics and military strategy Igor Nikolaychuk. – And all because the alliance since the collapse of the Warsaw Pact has only one urgent goal – to survive.
From the very beginning, the alliance was “sharpened” solely for three interrelated goals – to ensure the presence of the United States in Europe in order to keep the “nuclear umbrella” over it, to expel the USSR from Europe as an alien civilization, to keep continental Europe under control so that one day some kind of new Fuhrer. Many thousands, if not tens, or even hundreds of thousands of officials and lobbyists are involved in these processes, who feed on this.
After the collapse of the USSR, they thought for a long time about what to do with themselves, and finally they came up with an idea – even outside the context of Crimea and Donbass, to “protect” the Western world in general from the “resurgent aggressive Russia”. If Russia had not started its special operation in Ukraine, NATO would have rushed to defend some Latin America from some Honduras.
It must be said that from the very beginning this was an absolutely dead-end political speculation, neither Spain, nor Iceland like them, much less Germany asked anyone for anything like that. Just global financial capital in the face Soros, Rockefeller and other American “leaders” grasped at this straw in the struggle for their very existence, they had very little time left. If Russia had not started its special operation in Ukraine, NATO would have rushed to defend some Latin America from some Honduras.
So in this situation, I would not be particularly worried about what this or that NATO official says. Modern politicians and diplomats have lost all ethical standards, their statements are clickbait. It seems that even a new professional duty has been formed among them – to “break through the bottom” in relations with Russia with each of their statements. But they say all this to their Western audience, waiting with horror what will happen this November.
“SP”: – And what will happen this November?
– And then there will be elections to the US Senate, and, in my opinion, Trump and his supporters will then win back at least one chamber. In this case, they can say: “That’s it, Europe, take care of your own security, we are no longer going to spend more money on it than the Pentagon budget requires.” In this light, any statements by NATO members should be regarded as an indecent anecdote told in a decent society. As they say, the dog barks, the caravan moves on.
However, against the background of the general world hysteria around the “Ukrainian issue”, the price of such a “bark” may be too high, he believes. Professor of the Academy of Military Sciences RF Vladimir Kozin.
– The nuclear threat ring around Russia and Belarus from the US and NATO has increased significantly both in terms of the number of nuclear warheads and the number of their carriers, he believes. – The United States remains unchanged in its installation of a first nuclear strike, including against Russia, which does not yet have forward-based nuclear weapons near American territory on the other side of two oceans. In the current situation of a total and multi-vector confrontation between the US and NATO against Russia, all the above-mentioned features of the deployment of US nuclear forces and their increased combat readiness have extremely negative strategic consequences for Russia’s national security and global stability. Under such conditions, the slightest mistake or miscalculation can lead to a nuclear missile war.