Given 30th anniversary of the Soviet collapse+with Putin's threats/demands, there's been a frenzy again over the q whether the West made a NATO-enlargement promise it later broke. I think we need to step back+consider some bigger issues re Euro security after end of Cold War 1/
The US sought to reassure the Soviets and then the Russians that the West wouldn't take advantage of Moscow's retreat from Europe after the end of the Cold War to undermine Russian security. It believed it delivered on that assurance. Why? 2/
The US withdrew huge numbers of troops from Europe and agreed to limit heavy weaponry. It believed NATO was becoming more of a political organization. NATO created Partnership for Peace, and later signed NATO-Russia Founding Act. 3/
Perhaps most importantly, US didn't believe that NATO's enlargement violated the assurance not to take advantage of Russia's retreat from Europe because it didn't view NATO as threatening to Russia. Clearly some of you think that's silly, but that's how US policymakers saw it. 4/
Russia of course watched NATO take in the entire former Warsaw Pact, the three Baltic countries, and then declare Ukraine and Georgia will become alliance members. It seemed the US/West had taken advantage of Russia's retreat after all. 5/
NATO's continued existence was enough to drive the Russians crazy because it was a reminder that the West was dominant in Europe after the Cold War. @KimberlyMarten does a nice job demonstrating the key issue was not enlargement but Russia's lost status 6/ cambridge.org/core/journals/…
A lot of people are arguing the West was/is insensitive to Russian security concerns, but let's not forget how much the US/West did to reassure Russia in the '90s that we weren't out to get them. But with NATO's continued existence, would any other steps have been sufficient? 7/
The US wanted NATO to continue after the Cold War because it enabled US to dominate European security. Everyone understood that, and many in the East wanted it. It understandably grated on the Russians, and of course it still does. 8/
If you think all NATO has to do is announce that certain parts of Europe are off limits to membership, and that will solve the problem with Russia, I don't believe the history of the last 30 years supports that view. 9/
And giving in to demands that go against the provisions of the Helsinki Final Act re no border changes by force/ability of free countries to make their own choices has huge implications for the future of Europe. 10/10
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
