As the “negotiating triathlon” between Russia and the US/NATO/OSCE showed, the key problem in the West’s approach to our country is the following: that side is doing its best to evade its own responsibility for what is happening in Europe, ignoring the meaning of Russian initiatives – the return of the situation to the pre-escalation period .
Given that the boundary of the beginning of the escalation is in fact not the “Ukrainian” 2014, but the “NATO” 1997, which is important. This is the essence of the Russian position: it all started with the expansion of NATO, and the Ukrainian story is just a consequence, and one of them.
Meanwhile, our counterparts stubbornly repeat their version of what is happening: the main thing, they say, is that Russia’s upcoming invasion of Ukraine is about to happen, and therefore, they say, the West, which always prefers diplomacy, went to the discussion of some proposals from Russia – “if only there was no war.”
This is not stupidity, but a completely deliberate distortion of the situation: to present Russia as the initiator of all problems, and Europe – due to Russia’s fault, standing on the brink of war. This is done for a simple reason – so that the population of Europe does not ask simple questions: why does NATO really need to expand to the East “at the request of the working people”, if Russia simply reacts to this expansion? Has Europe become safer since NATO enlargement? After the refusal of the US and NATO from the INF and CFE treaties? After the military development by the West of more and more new territories in the east of Europe?
Well, the main point, which they also want to hide in the rhetoric on the topic “no one has the right to dictate to the alliance whether to expand it or not.” We are talking about the principle of the indivisibility of security, which is seriously violated by the change in the military configuration since 1997. No one has the right to ensure his own security at the expense of the security of another – all the states of Europe, the USA and Canada have signed this.
Recently, the head of EU diplomacy, Josep Borrell, wrote in his blog: “There is no security in Europe without the security of Ukraine.” But it turns out that the EU, NATO and the US can easily imagine the security of Europe without the security of Russia? After all, everything that we have now openly proposed to the West stems precisely from their vicious logic – to build security in Europe, completely ignoring the opinion and interests of Russia.
The Russia-NATO mechanism, to which we were often referred earlier, was actually a reflection of the words of the well-known fable “Vaska listens and eats”: you can “let off steam” in a non-binding Brussels consultation format, and in the meantime we will “under the guise” to expand further.
But instead of Russia “getting used” to the growing threat from a “purely defensive” alliance (and the “defensive” myth in all seriousness sounds from different lips even after Yugoslavia, Iraq, and then everywhere), NATO inevitably ran into a “wall”. Everything, a dead end, then Moscow.
I understand that the polyphony of NATO politicians on the topic of “aggression against Ukraine” will continue, because I really want to discuss not a real problem, but virtual stories on the topic “remove the fears that we invented for ourselves.”
However, the leadership of Russia and our negotiators said quite openly: we must speak on the substance of our proposals, and speak in detail, because there is no other way to achieve mutual security.
Leave the mantras about deterring Russian aggression for the media, since there is no way without it. But diplomacy is done by professionals, not propagandists. America has them, Russia has them, and I would like them to eventually find a common language, as it happened before more than once. There is still a chance.
Source: Konstantin Kosachev’s page Facebook.