Military Review

NATO-Russia: there will be no return to previous relations

38
In Brussels, the first in two years meeting of the Russia-NATO Council was held, at which the Ukrainian problem, European security issues, and the situation in Afghanistan were discussed. Following the meeting, both sides declared the possibility of further dialogue, but noted that they will not be able to restore the previous relationship, reports RIA News.


NATO-Russia: there will be no return to previous relations


“The NATO allies and Russia have very different views, but we listened to what each of us wanted to say,” said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

He noted “the importance and usefulness of the political dialogue between countries that share the Euro-Atlantic space”, but stressed that “there will be no return to the previous state of relations”.

A new meeting is possible, “however, its date and scale have yet to be determined,” the Secretary General noted.

For his part, Russia's permanent representative to NATO, Alexander Grushko, confirmed the possibility of new meetings, but only "subject to the interest of the parties on a positive agenda." So far, there is no such agenda.

“We are not interested in controversy for controversy. But if we see that there is a real desire to move towards a positive agenda, then why not hold it, ”said Grushko.

According to him, "all cooperation projects that really strengthened both the security of Russia and the security of the NATO countries are stopped." These include, for example, “training for the anti-drug services of Afghanistan, Central Asia and Pakistan and the maintenance of Russian and Soviet helicopters in Afghanistan”. In addition, “cooperation across the spectrum of countering terrorism has been discontinued, and the airspace cooperation initiative is a unique program and a unique system that allowed all NRC countries to exchange real information regarding air threats,” said the Permanent Representative.

At the same time, Grushko added that "Russia does not experience absolutely any discomfort from the lack of cooperation with NATO, since it cooperates on a bilateral basis with all countries that are ready for this on all security issues."

“Despite the inability of the alliance to go beyond purely politicized within blocs, manifested clearly during the discussions, Moscow continues to“ see the format of the Russian-NATO Council as a useful channel for consultations on key security issues, ”the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

The ministry noted that “from the Russian side, the meeting focused mainly on the destructive nature of the policy of military-political" containment "of Russia taken in the alliance."

Nevertheless, Moscow would like to rely on the fact that in NATO "they will be able to show political will and will demonstrate a truly responsible approach to establishing systemic interaction," the document says.
Photos used:
www.ntv.ru
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Finches
    Finches April 21 2016 08: 53
    +24
    Why the hell did she surrender to us - this is NATO! Do we need it? : laughing

    A gathering of nothing decisive American bedding - a militarized soup set!
    1. SRC P-15
      SRC P-15 April 21 2016 08: 56
      +7
      According to the results of the meeting, both sides announced the possibility of further dialogue, but noted that they would not be able to restore their previous relations, RIA Novosti reports.

      That's right: "They don't enter the same river twice."
      1. DIMA45R
        DIMA45R April 21 2016 09: 10
        +13
        Quote: Finches
        Why the hell did she surrender to us - this is NATO! Do we need it? : laughing

        A gathering of nothing decisive American bedding - a militarized soup set!

        To be friends with a community created to fight with us, whose head declares us the enemy number one ... all of whose members, from small to large, spit saliva in us for praise and approval.
        Only "dialogue" to conduct and "partnership cooperation" beneficial to us ...
        1. Tatyana
          Tatyana April 21 2016 09: 44
          +6
          In short, the outcome of negotiations between Russia and NATO is that the Pentagon leaders of NATO, under the gaze and openly revealing arguments of the Russian Federation, RECOGNIZED and WRITTEN that they will continue to pursue their policy of strengthening their passive aggression in the preparation of the war of NATO countries against Russia.
          However, at the same time, a clear clarification and awareness of the positions of the warring parties on this issue is strategically very good and very useful both for Russia and for the United States itself. Since each of the negotiators, having assessed the real situation and the balance of forces, will consciously make and demonstrate his choice to the world. First of all, it is beneficial for Russia to get rid of deceptive liberal illusions imposed on it by the collective West under the leadership of the United States, in relation to the so-called globalist guarantees of peace in Europe by the United States.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. Altona
          Altona April 21 2016 09: 48
          +4
          Quote: Tatiana
          In short, the outcome of negotiations between Russia and NATO is that the Pentagon leaders of NATO, under the gaze and openly revealing arguments of the Russian Federation, RECOGNIZED and WRITTEN that they will continue to pursue their policy of strengthening their passive aggression in preparing the war of NATO countries against Of Russia.
          However, at the same time, a clear clarification and awareness of the positions of the warring parties on this issue is strategically very good and very useful both for Russia and for the United States itself.

          -------------------------------
          In general, that's probably so. Therefore, it was stated that there was no point in gathering in order to lay out the next horror stories to each other. All this can be seen. Therefore, let’s decide something, make concessions, take tanks away, and remove nuclear weapons from the European theater of operations. And in general, more is less politics.
          1. Lelek
            Lelek April 21 2016 15: 53
            +1
            Quote: Altona
            Therefore, let’s decide something, make concessions, take tanks away, and remove nuclear weapons from the European theater of operations. And in general, more is less politics.


            No need to be naive. Tanks, nuclear weapons and other structures will not be withdrawn for the main reason - the "golden calf". The more weapons on the European (and not only) continent, the higher the pyramids of gold bars among American "gunsmiths", the more countries and continents are dependent on the decisions of the Anglo-Saxon industrial elite. NATO is the offspring of goat-bearded Sam and will do what "daddy" orders. Russia does not fit into the Bilderberg scheme, and therefore there will never be "friendship."
            (cry.)
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. cniza
      cniza April 21 2016 08: 59
      +6
      Let them be smart, they will come running, but they must speak and poke their nose in their shit ... that they put off all over the world.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Baloo
      Baloo April 21 2016 09: 09
      +8
      "Russia not experiencing absolutely no discomfort from lack of cooperation with NATO, because on all security issues it cooperates on a bilateral basis with all countries that are ready for this. "

      The bear is the owner of the taiga and it is not worth the gophers and other animals to rub in vain near the forest inadvertently and accidentally step on and crush it. But the buzz-buzz of insects is not a hindrance to the bear. Who needs to be calibrated, and so at the right time.
      1. DMB_95
        DMB_95 April 21 2016 09: 47
        +1
        Quote: Balu


        The bear is the owner of the taiga and it is not worth the gophers and other animals to rub in vain near the forest inadvertently and accidentally step on and crush it. But the buzz-buzz of insects is not a hindrance to the bear. Who needs to be calibrated, and so at the right time.

        And why the hell should a bear spend time on animals that do not decide on their own? When their overseas trainer once again realizes that his zoo is useless, he will call the bear himself.
    5. Andrey K
      Andrey K April 21 2016 09: 29
      +5
      They perceive relations in the style of a "nipple" - we are their signature in the CFE Treaty, they are an extension and bases at our side. With amers signature on missile defense, and they are already on the part of NATO from "Iran". We transit them to Afghanistan, and they turn a blind eye to the increase in opium plantations and the production of heroin tenfold and wash their hands - "these are not their tasks" ...
      And other and other. With such partners, they can reach the grave in two ways, they can even dance on a knoll, maybe even for free ...
    6. Vend
      Vend April 21 2016 09: 35
      0
      Quote: Finches
      Why the hell did she surrender to us - this is NATO! Do we need it? : laughing

      A gathering of nothing decisive American bedding - a militarized soup set!

      Not necessary, but it is a good platform for discrediting Western policy
      1. Pavel Tsybai
        Pavel Tsybai April 21 2016 11: 15
        +6
        I will not be original, but after how many years and how relevant.
    7. Eragon
      Eragon April 21 2016 11: 11
      0
      Quote: Finches
      Why the hell did she surrender to us - this is NATO! Do we need it?

      NECESSARY !!!
      "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."(C)
      1. Kasym
        Kasym April 21 2016 15: 42
        -1
        I also think that it is necessary. But that's just not in Brussels, but even if they come to Moscow or better to Kamchatka (Sakhalin, Kuriles)) so that they can feel the distances. And first of all, accept Stoltenberg and ask him for the words that he spoke for the Russian Federation (aggressor, threat, etc.). If she apologizes publicly, then she can go forward. And so, excuse me, tomorrow they will have the same "diarrhea" again, if they need to.
        Syria and the May 9 parade opened the eyes of many. I do not mean NATO countries. The alliance now looks "rusty" and backward:
        Abrams - T-15
        Bradley - T-14 and Kurganets (BMP-3)
        Patriot - S-400
        F-15 - Su-27 (family)
        M-16 - AK (family)
        Minetman2 (3) - Sarmat (Yars, Mace, Barguzin); EW, turntables, etc ..
        The demonstration in Syria will attract new customers, but from app. samples will be turned away. It is clear that the Yankees hold their NATO friends firmly in one place; but many other countries.
        As one Turkish journalist said yesterday. "Putin is the most expensive, world BRAND and everyone wants to" touch "him in order to become popular and significant" (something like that). So, you need to be able to use it. That is, to "sew off" the alliance at first, but leave a window for them (the door, especially the front door, will be bold) - here and there correct your "jambs", apologize publicly, saying that now everyone understands that nothing can be decided without the Russian Federation in BV and Eastern Europe, Asia and Lat. America. I understand the mentality of Europeans, but in Asia such an approach will mean a lot - show not in words, but in deeds that Russia does not really need an alliance. Humiliate them. hi
  2. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 April 21 2016 08: 54
    +2
    You might think that someone is asking for some kind of relationship with mattresses.
  3. Gerfalcon
    Gerfalcon April 21 2016 08: 55
    +8
    In relations with NATO, only the strength and number of deployed warheads play a role, and for the rest they spat on the bell tower.
    1. WKS
      WKS April 21 2016 09: 17
      +3
      Relations with NATO. Sounds like a joke. NATO is a bunch of fish-sticking on the body of a huge shark-USA. What kind of relationship can be with sticky? Yes, even with a bunch. All relations must be built with the shark, and a bunch of sticks will float behind it in any direction and in any case, unless they stick to another shark.
    2. fif21
      fif21 April 21 2016 12: 11
      0
      Previous relations led to the bombing of Yugoslavia, a military coup in Ukraine, the emergence of American troops in the Baltic states, and ships in the Black Sea ... And after that they want to live in safe Europe? fool We are not vindictive, we are evil and we have a good memory. The only thing that can save Europe from flogging is the US withdrawal from NATO, and the withdrawal of American troops. hi
  4. avvg
    avvg April 21 2016 08: 55
    +3
    After all, you cannot be lovely. We will always be NATO's "potential enemies" and nothing will change. Russia's geopolitical interests never coincide with those of the West.
  5. antiexpert
    antiexpert April 21 2016 08: 57
    +1
    NATO can not provide security from terrorists, but at the same time is at war with the Russian Federation)))
    1. fif21
      fif21 April 21 2016 11: 34
      0
      Quote: antiexpert
      NATO can not provide security from terrorists, but at the same time is at war with the Russian Federation)))
      NATO is a military instrument of Western policy. The RF Armed Forces is a military instrument of Russian politics. Until the politicians agree, there is no sense in communication between the military. The army can protect the country from a terrorist state. From terrorists operating within the country, only special services with the support of lawmakers can protect. hi
    2. The comment was deleted.
  6. Mikhail m
    Mikhail m April 21 2016 08: 57
    +2
    Russia is rising from its knees, which they even began to understand in NATO. When we stand at full height, and this will certainly happen, the conversation will be completely different. Some will have to answer for things.
  7. Masya masya
    Masya masya April 21 2016 09: 05
    +5
    Was it worth getting ready? Find out that "a possible dialogue" is not possible?
  8. Stiletto
    Stiletto April 21 2016 09: 07
    +1
    I do not understand why it is necessary to enter into any "relationship" with the enemy at all. NATO can at least be called "partners" or called "colleagues", but the essence will not change. It is necessary to carefully guard the borders, create reserves, and bend our line - China is an example. We have nothing to talk or negotiate with the hypocrites from NATO, everything is already clear, the masks have been torn off long ago.
    1. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky April 21 2016 12: 01
      +5
      Quote: Stiletto
      We need to carefully guard the borders, create reserves, and bend our line - China as an example. We have nothing to talk about or negotiate with hypocrites from NATO, everything is already clear, the masks have been torn for a long time.
  9. demo
    demo April 21 2016 09: 08
    +2
    When there were only founding countries in NATO, then both they and we had a certain approach in relations.
    It was clearly clear and understandable - this is the enemy.
    After the collapse of the USSR, all the ballast in the form of social. the camps were "rolled overboard."
    It is clear that THIS cannot live without the OWNER.
    And it nailed to the shore, where they seemed to be as if glad.
    And there they feel equal among the greats.
    And he was assigned a specific role - small, plump-headed, brainless dogs.
    At the behest of the conductor, they begin to play the written role.
    And the old participants are beginning to pretend that they have there in NATO-democracy.
    And they cannot do anything.

    We, Russia, were lulled by the songs of overseas magicians.
    And our homegrown Harvard project members sang in unison with them.
    And when we woke up from pink dreams, it turned out that no one thought to be friends with us.
    And the role was assigned to us - the lamb to the slaughter.

    But the prize was noble!
    And the USSR collapsed and Russia was torn apart.

    Not fused.
  10. Tusv
    Tusv April 21 2016 09: 09
    0
    there will be no return to the previous state of relations

    I will answer with a phrase from a joke
    -Can I firmly count on this? (Honey, I'll stay at work)
    Will democracy no longer teach us?
  11. niksan2002
    niksan2002 April 21 2016 09: 09
    0
    NATO is already wrong, they have scored all sorts, and now they don’t know what to do with them. New members only interfere.
    1. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky April 21 2016 11: 57
      0
      Quote: niksan2002
      NATO is already wrong, they have scored all sorts, and now they don’t know what to do with them. New members only interfere.

      Is this regret ?????
  12. Rav075
    Rav075 April 21 2016 09: 10
    +3
    Only for one Yugoslavia should NATO be recognized as a military criminal organization.
  13. okunevich_rv
    okunevich_rv April 21 2016 09: 13
    0
    Talking with lunatics can negatively affect the mental health of a normal person. At a minimum, you will begin to feel incomplete.
    NATO is a pack of ex-people who want to show their worth.
    With sixes, questions are not resolved, questions are resolved with the owners of the pack.
    In foreign policy, our government enjoys the exceptional support of the Russians.
  14. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 April 21 2016 09: 13
    -1
    however, noted that the previous relationship will not be able to restore

    Naturally. The time has passed when Russia (Gobachev-Yeltsin) made unilateral concessions, believed in the words of the West. After the new Russia tried to talk with NATO (read the United States) on equal terms, "interest" in our country began to fade away quickly to the point of breaking up the Russia-NATO dialogue. And with today's Russia, the freaks of the West will not go unambiguously.
  15. Grigorievich
    Grigorievich April 21 2016 09: 15
    +2
    She died, she died, resuscitation does not help. There is nothing to do there.
  16. Alexandr2637
    Alexandr2637 April 21 2016 09: 17
    0
    It is possible to conduct a "dialogue" with NATO only from a position of strength.
    If any, of course, there is ....
  17. Ros 56
    Ros 56 April 21 2016 09: 23
    -2
    “The NATO allies and Russia have very different views, but we listened to what each of us wanted to say,” said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.


    Why do you freak shit bastard, what kind of allies? There is a senior and everyone else in growth (of course, the economy and the military component). And then respectable people in the rest of the world do not seem to understand that tribaltes and pshek on a leash are jumping. We are talking with the states, the rest have sixteenth.
    Naturally, what happened in the 90s will no longer be, and you at least force the entire territory of the tribalt tanks (you will go wherever you go), there will be no sense.
    1. Ros 56
      Ros 56 April 21 2016 15: 56
      0
      Well, who does not agree?
  18. Pitot
    Pitot April 21 2016 09: 27
    +1
    NATO wants to soften attacks on its fifth point. Fuss like under the client .....
  19. sergey2017
    sergey2017 April 21 2016 10: 04
    +1
    There will be no return to the previous state of relations and there is no need to meet!
  20. Demeter
    Demeter April 21 2016 10: 04
    +1
    And I do not need relations with NATO, after NATO deployed its soldiers and missiles at the borders of Russia. There is no Russian army on the borders of the United States, it is the United States, like typhoid lice, climb the borders of the Russian Federation. Yankees, get out!
  21. Million
    Million April 21 2016 10: 04
    +1
    It would be nice if the words of our rulers did not diverge. US - enemies! Were, are and will be enemies
  22. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov April 21 2016 10: 35
    +1
    Quote: Finches
    Why the hell did she surrender to us - this is NATO! Do we need it? : laughing

    A gathering of nothing decisive American bedding - a militarized soup set!

    I agree. We must speak with the United States. We will agree with the United States, the rest will nod and agree to everything.
  23. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat April 21 2016 10: 39
    0
    Rogozin once wrote that when he was establishing his work with NATO officials, at first he was faced with a "cold" and even "disgusting" attitude towards himself on their part, but he did not "give up", but became theirs " to feed "various kinds of" buffet tables "," meetings "," assemblies "at which there were very good banquets and libations and a miracle happened - the people" stretched out ". Obviously now NATO officials, accustomed to free food and booze, have become very tight, so they are trying to "improve" relations, but they were hinted that there will be no more free food and booze from the kind Russians, so they were offended. Haha.
  24. koshmarik
    koshmarik April 21 2016 11: 30
    +1
    I get the impression that NATO, as a military organization, is practically incapable of fighting. Of course, in technical equipment, the preponderance is on the side of NATO, but equipment does not fight without people. I can hardly imagine how the Americans, the French, the Greeks and the Bulgarians there - abandoning all their affairs will rush to shed their blood for the Balts who have gone out of their minds or for Erdogan. The motivation of the NATO "eagles" is almost zero. Let us recall that only a harmless overflight of our SU "Cook" in the Black Sea put 0 American soldiers out of action.
  25. rus-5819
    rus-5819 April 21 2016 12: 20
    0
    "We are not interested in polemics for the sake of polemics. But if we see that there is a real desire to move towards a positive agenda, then why not hold it," Grushko said.

    Apparently the Europeans do not have enough formats like "and to talk?"
    OSCE? PACE, G-7, now also NATO-Russia?
    Except for a drink ..., they are no longer able to do anything, what, tolerance and gender education: - women rule!