I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended?
The leadership focused on creating proper conditions for deepening partnership with the West. As it turned out later - in fact, it became clear fairly quickly, but almost all our politicians and citizens found it out later - our role in that “partnership” was that of the “little brother.” We were assigned this role. This, of course, was a huge mistake.
Many Western analysts now acknowledge in their memoirs that there was no sense in expanding NATO and keeping Russia “on the sidelines.”
On that day, Crimean citizens made a free, conscious and independent choice regarding their own and their children’s future. This was a fair and long-awaited decision for Crimeans as well as for all citizens of our country.
NATO’s “humanitarian intervention” can serve as an example of modern barbarity and the rule-based world order and its backbone value: unfounded belief in its own superiority. <...> This is what Western democracy and freedoms look like. This view is still dominating in the West, where thousands of killed Yugoslavian civilians, including 89 children, are cynically called collateral damage. This is democracy with freedom of speech.
I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended?
The leadership focused on creating proper conditions for deepening partnership with the West. As it turned out later - in fact, it became clear fairly quickly, but almost all our politicians and citizens found it out later - our role in that “partnership” was that of the “little brother.” We were assigned this role. This, of course, was a huge mistake.
Many Western analysts now acknowledge in their memoirs that there was no sense in expanding NATO and keeping Russia “on the sidelines.”
