Military Review

How Russia reacted to the first NATO expansion after the collapse of the USSR

64
How Russia reacted to the first NATO expansion after the collapse of the USSR

Until now, the question remains about the agreement between the USSR and the United States on NATO's "non-expansion" to the east. It is usually pointed out that in 1990, one of the Soviet conditions for agreeing to the unification of Germany was NATO's refusal to include new members from Eastern European countries.


Was there a deception?


It is believed that Washington agreed to abandon the expansion of the Alliance, but violated the agreement, which was concluded orally. In the West, they argue that there was no such promise and could not be, since such decisions are made collectively by all NATO members, and not individually by the United States.

Actually, it was initially naive for the Soviet side to rely on mere verbal assurances that NATO would not expand eastward without backing them up with seals and signatures. This may indicate either that nothing of the kind was discussed, or the negotiations on behalf of the USSR were conducted by complete profane, or Moscow then did not count on compliance with the agreements and did not want them.

Even if there was a contract, it was in no way supported by documents. That is, we cannot demand compliance with it. And its official registration would hardly have led to anything, because the United States would still violate the terms of this document. And they would refer to the fact that the second participant in the negotiations, the Soviet Union, no longer exists.

Therefore, the dispute over whether there was an agreement hardly has any practical meaning.

Historic 50th NATO Summit


When the Cold War ended and the USSR collapsed, the members of the former Warsaw Pact began to communicate with the North Atlantic Alliance in a more intimate and friendly manner. And already in 1999, several countries that were previously considered part of a single socialist camp joined the Alliance. The first "swallows" were Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland, which officially entered NATO on March 12, 1999.

This happened at the 50th anniversary summit of the military bloc in Washington, but it is difficult to call this step sudden and unexpected, since preparations for it lasted for several years. The fundamental possibility of further expansion in NATO was announced back in 1994. In Russia, even liberals who advocate rapprochement with the West reacted negatively to this. For example, Anatoly Chubais criticized the Alliance for the fact that its expansion would become an expression of the West's distrust of the political and economic reforms being carried out in our country.

The final decision to join NATO for the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary was made in 1997 at the Madrid Summit. At the same time, the future NATO members expressed that they should not stop at what has been achieved and should begin preparations for admission to the ranks of the Baltic countries. And Poland also proposed Ukraine's candidacy.

In addition, then for the first time after the collapse of the USSR, the military bloc began to include former Soviet allies in its composition, they adopted another historical decision. It was decided that the forces of the Alliance could be used outside of it.



Having received this right from itself, the North Atlantic bloc immediately hastened to implement it. Less than two weeks after the summit, NATO bombing of Yugoslavia began. Thus, the world was shown that there was a master who should be obeyed. And the one who does not want to bow his head will be punished.


It was then that the last illusions about the fact that the Alliance would be disbanded as unnecessary and that it did not pose a threat to our country disappeared in Russia.

Sharp RF reaction


Of course, Russia is not thrilled with NATO getting closer to its borders. From the point of view of the military, the closer the Alliance is to us, the faster it can deploy its troops, the less time Russia will have to bring its troops to a state of readiness. And the time for enemy missiles to approach targets in the European part of our country is decreasing. This is understandable to non-military people.

After 1994, when they began to talk about the potential for admitting new members to NATO, the President of Russia was neutral about this. But when Madrid specifically decided to join the Alliance of the three former socialist countries, Yeltsin refused to attend the NATO summit in protest.

And after a few days after the admission of the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary to the Alliance, the North Atlantic bloc began aggression against Yugoslavia, Russia reacted even more sharply. We are talking about the U-turn of the plane over the Atlantic in which Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov flew to the United States, and his return to Russia. We will not dwell on this expression of protest against both the bombing of Yugoslavia and the admission of new members from Eastern Europe to NATO, because it was not the only one.

The Alliance's invasion of the Balkans was perceived in the Kremlin as an act of blatant aggression. Russia began to curtail cooperation with NATO, which by that time was already quite close. Moscow has recalled its Chief Military Representative to the military bloc, suspended participation in the Partnership for Peace and Russia-NATO programs, as well as in other joint initiatives.

In addition, in the Pacific Ocean, the Navy conducted large-scale military exercises involving a large number of surface and submarine warships, in which, among other things, missile launches were practiced. The Russian Federation also announced the intensification of intelligence activities and an increase in the combat readiness of the Armed Forces. It was also announced about the transfer of part of the Black Sea fleet in the Mediterranean Sea.

As Yevgeny Primakov later admitted, the main purpose of this pressure was the hope that it would cause a split between the United States and European NATO members and force the Alliance to end its military operation in the Balkans.


New convergence


Convinced that, despite the harsh reaction of Russia to the expansion of NATO and its military operation against Yugoslavia, no disagreements between the members of the Alliance are manifested, Moscow resigned to what was happening, softened and resumed cooperation with the North Atlantic bloc in some areas.

In particular, Viktor Chernomyrdin, on behalf of President Yeltsin, joined the negotiations on a peaceful settlement in the Balkans. They did not send the fleet to the Mediterranean either; only the Liman reconnaissance ship was transferred there.

And already in 2000, the likelihood of our country joining the Alliance was even admitted. True, no practical steps were taken for this. But be that as it may, and cooperation between Russia and NATO by that time was restored almost in full. Moreover, in 2001, the Russian Federation supported the Alliance's military operation in Afghanistan. But she refused to take part in it.

More than 20 years have passed since the first post-Soviet NATO expansion. Since then, virtually all of Eastern Europe, including the "Baltic tigers", has become members of the Alliance. Prospects of Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO are now being seriously discussed. For Kiev, despite all its efforts and anti-Russian rhetoric, the chances of becoming a member of the Alliance are slim. Georgia, on the contrary, is already in fact with one foot in the North Atlantic bloc.

As for Russia, today its relations with NATO are no better than those of the Cold War. And we again look at each other through the sight and strengthen the defense. After all, it is worth relaxing and we will turn into another Yugoslavia.
Author:
Photos used:
NATO website, https://ru.wikipedia.org/Not home, Facebook / US Army
64 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 27 December 2020 15: 04
    -2
    How Russia reacted to the first NATO expansion after the collapse of the USSR
    Wiped off. And more than once. request But now try to move without Putin's visa in Europe ... recourse
    1. GTYCBJYTH2021
      GTYCBJYTH2021 27 December 2020 15: 15
      +8
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      How Russia reacted to the first NATO expansion after the collapse of the USSR
      Wiped off. And more than once. request But now try to move without Putin's visa in Europe ... recourse

      And what former republic requires Putin's visa to join NATO - ANYWHERE !!! Russia no longer contains them on its neck ... hi
      1. hydrox
        hydrox 27 December 2020 17: 08
        -1
        Of course, it does not, but on the other hand, the Baltic koshans receive less and less funds from the transit of Russian and Belarusian goods, and the free Sunday soup has become NOT enough for more hungry people, besides, the trickle of handouts to sprats from the EU will completely dry up by the end of 21 years ... So the question is: should Russia at least help its neighbors in the Soviet communal apartment with coffins, despite the fact that the sprats lived much more prosperous than Russia.
        1. Dkuznecov
          Dkuznecov 28 December 2020 21: 20
          +2
          What good is it
          that the neighbors are in trouble?
          Some kind of unhealthy gloating.

          Yes, we are now surrounded by a crowd
          hungry, poor, angry because of this
          neighbors. Already crossed the line of their own
          dignity.

          Only there is nothing to be happy about.
          Our Foreign Ministry has simply lost all ties.

          Although, in theory, it was supposed to protect and
          strengthen. And not to dance Kalinka-lezkinka.
          And the Foreign Ministry is engaged in the fact that for every crack
          wailing, rolling her eyes - "But it doesn't hurt us, it doesn't hurt!"
      2. Civil
        Civil 28 December 2020 08: 00
        +2
        How is NATO attacking again? Does everyone still want to plunge their rich countries into the chaos of war? Why don’t you tell me? It's already boring ...
    2. bandabas
      bandabas 27 December 2020 15: 31
      +2
      Only if based on the "RenTV" TV channel. Everything is cool there. Even the semi-official "First" and others like him nervously smoke on the sidelines.
  2. pytar
    pytar 27 December 2020 15: 10
    +4
    It is believed that Washington agreed ... but violated the agreement that was negotiated orally. In the West, they say that there was no such promise and could not be ... Actually, for the Soviet side it was initially naive to rely on only verbal assurances that NATO would not expand eastward without backing them up with seals and signatures. This may indicate either that nothing of the kind was discussed, or the negotiations on behalf of the USSR were conducted by complete profane, or Moscow then did not count on the observance of the agreements and did not want them.

    There were no statements and promises! And the Soviet side did not demand anything like that! Gorbachev, and after him Yeltsin, did not demand the signing of any binding documents for one very simple reason! They intended to join the USSR / RF to NATO! The then leadership of the USSR / RF envisioned a future in which Russia, as a weighty member of the Alliance, rules the world together with the USA and Europe! That's the whole "mystery"! hi
    1. Land defence
      Land defence 27 December 2020 15: 18
      +19
      The Russian leadership of those times was not very smart, and, moreover, it was confused by the abrupt movements of the United States. And the NATO bloc made the right decision - over time, emotions and hostility will subside.
      1. pytar
        pytar 27 December 2020 18: 18
        +1
        The Russian leadership of those times was not very smart, and, moreover, it was confused by the abrupt movements of the United States. And the NATO bloc made the right decision - over time, emotions and hostility will subside.

        Perhaps it is. It is unlikely that someone HERE will challenge the erroneousness of the then actions of the Russian leadership. But in the meantime, the situation looked completely different! After the end of the Cold War, general optimism reigned, there were many hopes for a better future! Yeltsin constantly talked about "Europe from the English Channel to Kamchatka!"
        1. kit88
          kit88 28 December 2020 11: 42
          +7
          Russia as a weighty member of Alliance rules the world together with the USA and Europe!

          No, well, a naive man in the street could certainly think so. That the West will help us, that Russia will be equal among equals ...
          But the leadership of a huge country is not naive simpletons, they had to understand elementary common truths. That some are always a little smoother than others. That no one will share power and talk on equal terms with an obviously weaker "partner".
          1. pytar
            pytar 28 December 2020 12: 01
            0
            No, well, a naive man in the street could certainly think so. That the West will help us, that Russia will be equal among equals ...But the leadership of a huge country is not naive simpletons, they had to understand elementary truisms... That some are always a little smoother than others. That no one will share power and talk on equal terms with an obviously weaker "partner".

            Hello Alexander! hi Skip blah blah blah oh "naive layman"and return to documents, contracts! From their content it is clear that "the leadership of a huge country" proceeded from the assumption that it would be possible to integrate the country into the Western system. It had some reason. In the 1990s, it was widely believed that the military-political alliance would turn into a political-military one. The priority will be precisely the development of a political community based on common values ​​and supporting the military component within the minimum necessary framework. OVD and NATO were created on the basis of the antagonistic ideology "communism <-> anti-communism". But in the 90s Russia became a capitalist country. It seemed that the ideological basis for confrontation had disappeared. In fact, it was so, but they did not take into account that other contradictions in interests appeared. Even so, up to 2014, Russia and NATO actively cooperated, both at the political and military levels.
            And there is something else ... The Kremlin elite, having accumulated significant resources on the basis of the privatization of national wealth, decided that it "rightfully" a place in the world elite club! And there, as it turned out, they just don't take the new rickshaw, no matter how rich they are! Until you go to the "gold standard" group, you will have to wait in the waiting room for more than one generation!
        2. Dkuznecov
          Dkuznecov 28 December 2020 21: 26
          0
          "Yeltsin always said .."
          And he signed the Belovezhskaya agreements,
          ghoul. And grabbed loans from the IMF.
          Just handsome.
    2. Cron
      Cron 27 December 2020 15: 50
      +1
      Quote: pytar
      There were no statements and promises! And the Soviet side did not demand anything like that!

      What do you mean was not? Why write this nonsense? Another thing is that they had no legal force, but were used with the aim of probing the position and overcoming obstacles to the unification of Germany. What Genscher talked about later
      1. pytar
        pytar 27 December 2020 18: 26
        +1
        What do you mean was not? Why write this nonsense?

        Sometimes reality looks like nonsense, but this does not make it less real ...
        Another thing is that they did not have any legal force, but were used for the purpose of probing the position and overcoming obstacles to the unification of Germany ...

        It is unlikely that someone will say that the then Ross. the leadership was brilliant with intellect. But it is not worth considering it so naively stupid! On such a super-important question as the expansion of NATO to the East, no one in Moscow would have believed in verbal promises! This nonsense "they promised, but they deceived ..."They are replicating, in order to somehow explain, the Kremlin's conciliatory position of that time. The unification of Germany was one link in the chain of events. Russia intended to integrate into the Western sittema, including into military relations! There is no other way to explain the fact - "had no legal force ... "!
      2. bandabas
        bandabas 27 December 2020 18: 32
        0
        This is normal. The labeled pizza advertiser lives in Germany and thinks, gasping, he was right. He is very offended that practically no one respects him on the post-Soviet territory.
    3. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 27 December 2020 15: 53
      0
      There were no statements and promises! And the Soviet side did not demand anything like that!

      It is not true ... that you want to think so and members of the forum are deliberately misleading. hi
      The famous promise of the former head of the US Department of State James Baker that NATO "will not move an inch east", given by him at a meeting with President of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was just one of many given to the Soviet leadership in the framework of the process of German reunification.


      Details: https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2357302.html
      Any use of materials is allowed only if there is a hyperlink to REGNUM.
      1. pytar
        pytar 27 December 2020 18: 34
        +3
        It is not true ... that you want to think so and members of the forum are deliberately misleading.

        But then appeared Lech with Androidand, he told us everything, how it really is! laughing
        The famous promise of the former head of the State Department J. Baker that NATO "will not move an inch to the east", given by him at a meeting with the President of the USSR M. Gorbachev on 09.02.1990/XNUMX/XNUMX, was just one of many given to the Soviet leadership within the framework of the process of German reunification.

        "Promised does not mean married!"Russian proverb! Do you seriously believe that Gorbachev did not know this proverb? wink In politics, nothing is done by accident! What was the problem for Gorbachev, to set a condition and sign a NATO non-expansion treaty? The West probably would have agreed without any persuasion, in view of the dreamed end result - the elimination of the Eastern Bloc! By signing, the West would probably find other forms for the integration of the East. countries., so the legal form was hardly a problem. By the way, Russia actively cooperated with NATO under Yeltsin. There was quite a lot of talk about its entry into NATO.
      2. Kronos
        Kronos 27 December 2020 22: 25
        0
        Promises are not legally binding.
      3. Dkuznecov
        Dkuznecov 28 December 2020 21: 27
        0
        I made a promise to the President of the USSR, for a minute.
        The USSR is gone, and promises are gone.
        Thanks to Yeltsin.
        Like we were with Poland in 1939.
        "No Poland, we go in, don't play around."
    4. Krasnoyarsk
      Krasnoyarsk 27 December 2020 17: 43
      +1
      Quote: pytar
      The then leadership of the USSR / RF envisioned a future in which Russia, as a weighty member of the Alliance, rules the world together with the USA and Europe! That's the whole "mystery"!

      Boyan, you know how "the leadership of the USSR / RF envisioned the future."
      So can you tell us about your idea of ​​the future of Bulgaria?
      1. pytar
        pytar 27 December 2020 18: 38
        0
        Boyan, you know how "the leadership of the USSR / RF envisioned the future."

        Fact-based and some materials from that time. It was spoken, written, discussed. Many have already forgotten. They just don't like what happened.
        So can you tell us about your idea of ​​the future of Bulgaria?

        In another topic to which it is related. Under the one we write, it will most likely fall under the definition - "flood". I try to follow the rules of the site. hi
        1. Krasnoyarsk
          Krasnoyarsk 27 December 2020 21: 37
          0
          Quote: pytar

          Fact-based and some materials from that time.

          And did the leadership of the USSR / RF share with you their vision of the future, or did you just have one granny, well, maybe two, or even three said? wink
          1. pytar
            pytar 27 December 2020 23: 24
            0
            And did the leadership of the USSR / RF share with you their vision of the future, or did you just have one granny, well, maybe two, or even three said?

            No more than I shared with you. laughing It's just my granny, smarter than yours. bully
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk 28 December 2020 00: 17
              -1
              Quote: pytar

              No more than I shared with you. laughing Just my granny, smarter than yours.

              So that's why the smart granny wags her tail in front of the EU and NATO?
              But mine, stupid, does not wag its tail in front of anyone.
              Calm down, Boyan, you will agree that they were stupid about the fact that you know what the government of the USSR / RF represented. Nobody really knows what it represented.
              1. pytar
                pytar 28 December 2020 01: 47
                +4
                So that's why the smart granny wags her tail in front of the EU and NATO?

                This is not a grandma's tail ... 1. Turn on CHU! 2. Remove the mustache, raise your eyelids, they prevent you from seeing! laughing
                Calm down, Boyan, you will agree that they were stupid about the fact that you know what the government of the USSR / RF represented. Nobody really knows what it represented.

                And I will advise you to read more and THINK, THINK !!! Have you ever read the interstate treaties signed by the USSR / RF? There are thousands of them! For all sorts of topics and questions, sometimes quite insignificant! So, the agreement on corn was signed with Bongo Mgongo, but with NATO, on the most important issue for Russia, they "forgot"!?!?
                With NATO, the Russian Federation has signed a number of fundamental documents! In fact, similar ones are initially signed by all the candidate members of the Union! In 1991 Russia joined the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. Since 1994 she began to participate in the Partnership for Peace program. After the signing in Paris in May 1997 of the NATO-Russia Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security, the Permanent Joint Council operated. Diplomatic Representative of the Russian Federation to NATO since 1998. In 2002, the so-called. Rome Declaration "NATO-Russia Relations: A New Quality". On May 28, 2002, the Russia-NATO Council was established. On February 8, 2003, the Russian Defense Ministry and NATO Secretary General J. Robertson signed the Russia-NATO framework document. Russia not only participates in joint exercises, but also conducts joint peacekeeping operations with NATO. Russia has agreements with some NATO members on military-technical cooperation and joint development of various military products. The Russian Defense Ministry is solving the problem of increasing the degree of interoperability between the RVS units and NATO troops. On June 7, 2007, the President of the Russian Federation signed Federal Law No. 99 on the ratification of the agreement between the states parties to the North Atlantic Treaty and other states participating in the Partnership for Peace program on the status of forces dated June 19, 1995 and the Additional Protocol to it. " Some believe that this document allows NATO to deploy its troops on Russian territory.

                But the "Treaty banning the advancement of NATO to the East", no !!! Don't you think it's strange, illogical? fellow In fact, there is such an official document! This is the same "Russia-NATO Founding Act on VOSB" signed in Paris in May 1997!
                Due to the structure of the pact, no one can in any way give legal guarantees that new members will not be accepted! That is why in the question document, the deployment of troops near the border of the Russian Federation was limited, but the expansion of the alliance was not specified. Thus, Russia was able to maintain a relative military superiority in the territories adjacent to the countries of the former Eastern Bloc and the former Soviet republics of the Baltic states. By the way, for this reason, NATO contingents in Vost. Europe is still changing on a rotational basis.
                In short, everything is in style "NATO promised not to expand to the east, but it deceived naive Russia .."are propaganda speculation!
                This is what my grandma says. bully
                1. Krasnoyarsk
                  Krasnoyarsk 28 December 2020 09: 56
                  -1
                  Quote: pytar
                  speculation!
                  This is what my grandma says

                  Boyan, from your lengthy post, I understood - you do not understand the meaning of the Russian word - "to present"
                  And I do not blame you on this. hi
    5. The comment was deleted.
    6. The comment was deleted.
  3. paul3390
    paul3390 27 December 2020 15: 14
    +4
    One thing is not clear - is it for the alliance in feijoa? For the real combat effectiveness of the new members is, to put it mildly, doubtful .. I imagine this scene so-so - a type of Bundeswehr panzer-brigade is preparing to attack Russia .. On the left are the Hungarians, on the right, the Romanians, the Italians loom even further .. In the place of the Deutsches, I would have deserted right away, because the feeling deja vu should be sharp, painful and piercing .. Like, again ????
    1. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 27 December 2020 15: 27
      -2
      hi There are options. Throw pshekov across the Ruin, kicking them with a forged boot and waiting for the reaction of Russia, with a conventional weapon "at the headquarters". It's funny. And when it’s not scary, then knock down the camp "two by ten", including the frostbitten Lithuanians and frozen Norwegians.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. zwlad
      zwlad 27 December 2020 16: 19
      0
      For example, place on territorialinovyh members of the base, on which you will have to shoot nuclear weapons in the first place, so that then less will fly over a puddle. Our nuclear arsenal is not rubber.
    3. Dkuznecov
      Dkuznecov 28 December 2020 21: 33
      0
      Why are you so.
      The Alliance is a commercial structure.
      And she's thriving, mind you.
      As comrade umm said. a certain nationality
      in "Three Comrades" - "I always make a deal,
      if it brings in income. "

      NATO is a type of Pyaterochka network.
      Pure commerce, no slogans.

      What does the war have to do with it, if
      you can cut a subscriber, yes weapons
      sell, no one wants.
  4. RUSLAN
    RUSLAN 27 December 2020 15: 29
    +2
    "BALTIC TIGERS" - it is gorgeous! laughing
  5. parusnik
    parusnik 27 December 2020 15: 37
    0
    It is believed that Washington agreed to abandon the expansion of the Alliance, but violated the agreement, which was concluded orally.
    ... Uh-huh .. "I am naive, I trustful, I can be easily deceived! And all this is he, the evil Gray Wolf!" (C) .. Unification of Germany:
    "I, I, Kemsk volost, Kemsk volost!
    - Yes, let them take her to health, I thought, Lord! "(C) smile
  6. Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 27 December 2020 15: 41
    +3
    This may indicate either that nothing of the kind was discussed, or the negotiations on behalf of the USSR were conducted by complete profane, or Moscow then did not count on compliance with the agreements and did not want them.

    There was enough profanation in the country's leadership in those years, only it was "an imaginary profanation". We used to say about such profane people: "On my own mind."
    I read and listen to all these disputes around the issue of NATO expansion to the east, and I think that our current leaders will not respond in kind? At least, on the issue of transferring the water area in the Bering Sea to the United States. Why not remember the "famous" agreement on the sale of Alaska?
    And, what is curious, why no one allows to openly, legally annul the Decree on the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR without a preliminary referendum on this issue? Then what questions may arise about the inclusion of Russian territories in Kazakhstan, the Baltic States and Ukraine and on what basis.
    In our case, we should not expect anything good from the West. Although, some former citizens of the USSR and the Russian Federation have comfortably mastered the banks of the Thames, the Spanish Riviera, the Swiss and Austrian Alps and other attractive corners of the bloc members and "sympathizers".
    Isn't it time to start giving back on deeds? And to begin to do this persistently and consistently, setting a goal to have loyal neighbors at hand, and not nationalists and other spiteful critics ... After all, if you look around the neighborhood, the field is not plowed ...
    1. Avior
      Avior 27 December 2020 18: 26
      +4
      ... And, what is curious, why no one allows to openly, legally annul the Decree on the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR without a preliminary referendum on this issue?

      Well, if you're curious ..... winked
      Because the borders are determined by interstate agreements.
      Specifically with Ukraine - the agreement on the creation of the CIS, where the borders at the time of the collapse of the USSR are recognized, and the agreement on the border between Ukraine and the Russian Federation.
      Prior to this, the Decree on the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine was approved by the decision of the USSR Armed Forces, as provided for by the USSR Constitution.
      In addition, the transfer of Crimea was accompanied by amendments to Article 14 of the Constitution of the RSFSR on the administrative-territorial division of the RSFSR and the law on the administrative-territorial division of the RSFSR.
      Therefore, a simple cancellation of the transfer order does not solve anything.
      In general, the transfer decree was formally canceled in 1992. On May 21, 1992, the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation adopted Resolution No. 2809-1, which announced the resolution of the Presidium of the RSFSR Supreme Council of February 5, 1954 on the transfer of the Crimean Region to the Ukrainian SSR as having no legal force. But the point was not the cancellation of one resolution, it was about a whole system of laws.
      hi
  7. apro
    apro 27 December 2020 15: 42
    +4
    Having destroyed the Soviet civilization project, the Russians rushed towards the west ... and then they were shown their place ...
    Confrontation with NATO ???? and what are going to share not tell me what else the West has not received from the Russian Federation? For free of charge.bez any losses on their part.with the total destruction of industry in the Russian Federation and demographic degradation
    1. parusnik
      parusnik 27 December 2020 17: 07
      +3
      Confrontation with NATO ???? and what are you going to share?
      ... At the same time, NATO countries are partners for Russia, as our leadership declares. smile
  8. 7,62x54
    7,62x54 27 December 2020 17: 19
    +1
    Is it a harsh reaction to turn the plane around and conduct exercises?
  9. Avior
    Avior 27 December 2020 17: 25
    +3
    Gorbachev has some kind of childish babble that someone verbally promised him not to expand NATO
    He is just a small child, he did not understand that he was negotiating not with the hereditary owners of Vsega Zapad, but with temporarily appointed officials, who in five years at best would not be in positions, and those who would take their place would not be considered that they must fulfill someone's oral promises, and even those given to them by Gorbachev. This is some kind of naive reasoning. Why not tell him the truth? Either he didn’t care about the expansion of NATO, or he himself was going to join.
    1. Plastmaster
      Plastmaster 27 December 2020 18: 05
      0
      Quote: Avior
      Why not tell him the truth

      Gorbachev sucks history. He hangs upside down at my club. Not so long ago I held a competition, many modelers came. About 15 people came up and shook hands, like you're right. And only 2 young people asked about it, why is he like that.
  10. Alexey Lantukh
    Alexey Lantukh 27 December 2020 17: 34
    -5
    Actually, Georgia was forced to peace because of their actions in North Ossetia. The same is possible with respect to Ukraine or Belarus. As soon as their move towards NATO appeared, a cruise missile suddenly flew to an important military facility. Maybe even unauthorized.
    1. Dkuznecov
      Dkuznecov 28 December 2020 21: 42
      0
      Stop this extremism. Hollow neighbors ...
      The movement of the limitrophes is not their personal desire.
      Limitrophs are in the center of mass orbit.
      Let's fire at the moon for spinning
      around the earth, not another planet.
  11. Alexy
    Alexy 27 December 2020 17: 54
    0
    Baltic tigers ???
    More suitable - tattered cats
  12. iouris
    iouris 27 December 2020 18: 24
    0
    Was she at that moment?
  13. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 27 December 2020 19: 01
    -1
    In fact, it was initially naive for the Soviet side to rely on mere verbal assurances that NATO would not expand eastward without backing them up with seals and signatures. This may indicate either that nothing of the kind was discussed, or the negotiations on behalf of the USSR were conducted by complete profane ...

    It is clear, given NATO's impudence towards international law, to the point of outright arrogance, that none of its written commitments not to enlargement would have been fulfilled, nevertheless, Our main misfortune at that time was that our country was ruled by a truly complete layman, not naive, but simply an illiterate d ...... k, humpbacked Judas!
    1. zenion
      zenion 27 December 2020 20: 22
      0
      Why laymen, if there is a correct word - traitors.
  14. zenion
    zenion 27 December 2020 20: 22
    0
    How it did not react. This reaction was untrue and it reminds of an Odessa anecdote. Monya is walking down the street, and Moishe is walking towards him. Moishe - hello Monya, is it true? Really? That yesterday you met Aronchik, told him something and Aronchik punched you in the face, but you didn't even react? Monya, offended, as I did not react, I fell!
  15. Graduate student
    Graduate student 27 December 2020 20: 35
    +11
    the main purpose of this pressure was the hope that it would cause a split between the US and European NATO members and force the Alliance to end its military operation in the Balkans.

    The split did not happen, the aggression was not stopped.
  16. Graduate student
    Graduate student 27 December 2020 20: 37
    +12
    Moscow has come to terms with what is happening, softened and resumed cooperation with the North Atlantic bloc in some areas

    We must say frankly: we wiped ourselves off and resigned ourselves, and our enemies became partners. yes
  17. Graduate student
    Graduate student 27 December 2020 20: 39
    +10
    Georgia, on the contrary, is already in fact with one foot in the North Atlantic bloc.

    You don't even need to wang. Georgia will be admitted to NATO.
  18. Graduate student
    Graduate student 27 December 2020 20: 40
    +11
    And we again look at each other through the scope and strengthen the defense.

    It's strange ... And our authorities are claiming partnership with our enemies ...
    1. aglet
      aglet 30 December 2020 11: 43
      0
      "It's strange ... And our authorities are claiming partnership with our enemies ..."
      indeed, strange, for us enemies, for our authorities partners. who then is our power for us?
  19. APASUS
    APASUS 27 December 2020 21: 10
    +1
    For Kiev, despite all its efforts and anti-Russian rhetoric, the chances of becoming a member of the Alliance are slim. Georgia, on the contrary, is already in fact with one foot in the North Atlantic bloc.

    I wonder how they in NATO will get around the article, with the absence of conflicts and territorial claims from the new NATO members? Or Georgia will voluntarily give up Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But whoever decides to sign such an agreement from Georgia may lose not only his chair, but also his head.
    1. Kushka
      Kushka 27 December 2020 22: 51
      -1
      Can you name many contracts or
      their individual articles, provisions that could not
      overcome, those who strongly wanted it?
      The first example - Versailles - where and how Germany forged its
      tank, air skill and chemo weapons? Yes from all of Versailles
      only the smoke remained.
      The second is what Molotov said in September 1939 about the Treaty
      USSR and Poland? That we woke up and suddenly discovered by chance
      that there is no Poland (I was there yesterday, and disappeared somewhere)
      The third is what the GDP said about the Territorial Treaty
      integrity of Ukraine? - "We concluded it with another Ukraine"
      (and what else could he say after he repeatedly
      publicly admitted).
      What NATO did when Yugoslavia was impatient is right,
      allowed itself to be outside of itself.
      "Normal heroes always go around (S)"
    2. Avior
      Avior 28 December 2020 00: 56
      +1
      what you have listed, formally does not even need to be circumvented.
      When joining NATO, those who join should not have territorial claims to their neighbors. You yourself understand that from the point of view of NATO countries, they do not.
      In reality, of course, not only the formal side will be taken into account.
  20. Kushka
    Kushka 27 December 2020 23: 09
    0
    More about the vicissitudes in the fate of Treaties and Laws.
    At one English university, one quirky
    student, found in the Code of Laws from 17 ...
    year The law according to which the student if the exam lasts
    more than 4 hours should receive a mug of beer and smoked
    tongue. At the same time, this law continues to operate and
    Today. He filed a Protest. University Legal Council
    The protest was accepted and carefully studied. A month later
    the student was summoned to the council to read the verdict.
    It was announced to the student that in the same Code of Laws, but
    in the previous chapter, the current law was published,
    that a university student must be on the sword exam!
    And since he broke this law, his exam is canceled and
    The council reprimands him.
  21. north 2
    north 2 27 December 2020 23: 47
    -1
    all these Balts there, who dream of living like the Germans with their current policy towards Russia, must be explained - attack Russia like the Germans, get people like the Germans and you will live like the Germans. Only these lackeys of America do not understand that their territory as a possible springboard for NATO aggression against Russia will be destroyed in the first place. America also understands this and, perhaps, expects that if damage is done to Kaliningrad from NATO Lithuania and in response only ruins will be left in the place of this NATO bridgehead, then this release of vapor will be enough to sit down at the table to make peace with Russia without waiting. until Russian missiles fly to America and American missiles fly to mainland Russia. In the end, with the most terrible, atomic war in the European part of Russia, the development of the situation, Russia may retreat, it will shrink to the Urals, but where and to where will this Baltics shrink or retreat?
    Who will ask this question, who joined NATO only in order to make their territories NATO bridgeheads for aggression against Russia.
    And the fact that Russia then could not prevent the Baltic states from joining NATO was not the weakness of the Russian army. This was a betrayal of Russia's top leadership. It was not necessary to recognize the independence of these Baltic republics and not to withdraw Soviet-Russian troops from this Baltic until a written guarantee was given that these new formation would not join NATO and would not provide its territories for foreign military bases.
    Do you even believe that Turkish or German or French soldiers will go to lay their heads behind the beet fields in some Baltic region? And I don’t believe. But that NATO missiles can fly from bridgeheads in this Baltic to Russia, I believe in it. It's not for nothing that the Balts dreamed of living like the Germans ...
  22. Revolver
    Revolver 28 December 2020 04: 37
    +1
    or the negotiations on behalf of the USSR were conducted by complete profane
    Mishan Mechenny would better drive the combine harvester in the Stavropol region. This one, even if he had taxied the wrong way and broke, would hardly have earned a note in the regional circulation. But, alas, he climbed to steer the country.
  23. Captain45
    Captain45 28 December 2020 09: 28
    +3
    How Russia reacted to the first NATO expansion after the collapse of the USSR(C)
    There are two options for whom, which one likes best:
    1) worn out;
    2) silently wrapped around.
    1. Dkuznecov
      Dkuznecov 28 December 2020 21: 49
      0
      You would have your arms / legs chopped off in one fell swoop,
      how would you behave?
      Thank God they didn't grate cheese like Yugoslavia,
      center of power in the Balkans.
      1. aglet
        aglet 30 December 2020 11: 54
        0
        "Would you have your arms / legs chopped off at a stroke, how would you behave?"
        and what was cut off there then? the army remained, and there was more than it is now, there were immeasurable military equipment, there were much more resources, not everything was sold to partners then. so what was cut off there? the naive belief of the authorities that we are now our own, bourgeois, our opinion will be taken into account, so it has not diminished since then. just wrapped around, and still wrapped around. there was no political will then, as there is none now.
        1. Dkuznecov
          Dkuznecov 5 January 2021 00: 25
          0
          First of all - built and developed connections,
          production chains, logistics, planning,
          the specialists themselves with the best practices. Everything went to pieces.
          You perfectly understand
          that full cycle production
          in a single enterprise is unlikely.
          Losing subcontractors is a disaster.
          It's like breaking all cables in a data center rack.
          In 1995, I, a young specialist,
          returned to the enterprise in the direction, after graduating from the university ..
          He just looked around the empty office with broken glass. Within the territory of
          all heavy equipment was missing, cranes were cut
          on scrap metal. The remains of the equipment were listed only on paper.
          I dreamed about heavenly pretzels. Lifting, housing ... Yeah.

          Something like that.
  24. Anachoret
    Anachoret 28 December 2020 13: 05
    +2
    Gorbach's consent to the annexation of the GDR by NATO countries (after all, there are no intergovernmental agreements and decisions on the unification of Germany) is not only a betrayal of the Polabian Slavs and Soviet Slavic unity.
    This is a violation of the balance of security and defense capabilities of Russia as a whole.
    Since then, asymmetric responses have become our trademark. But often these answers in the form of "Primakov's U-turn", the dispatch of the spy ship Liman are just talk in favor of the poor.

    As in an old joke, "they rested very hard, but with their hands against the fence."
  25. Sergey Nemov
    Sergey Nemov 28 December 2020 22: 09
    +7
    it was initially naive for the Soviet side to rely on only verbal assurances

    it is naive to consider the West partners now
    1. aglet
      aglet 30 December 2020 11: 57
      0
      "it is naive to consider the West partners now"
      for you, maybe naive. and our authorities stubbornly consider them partners, they say so out loud