Thread by @ConservativeLA

"When NATO announced in 2002 its plan for a major wave of expansion that would include three former Soviet republics—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—Putin barely reacted. He certainly did not threaten to invade any of the countries to keep them out of NATO."

"Asked specifically...whether he opposed the Baltic states’ membership in NATO, he stated, 'We of course are not in a position to tell people what to do. We cannot forbid people to make certain choices if they want to increase the security of their nations in a particular way.'”

"In May 2002, when asked for his views on the future of Ukraine’s relations with NATO, Putin dispassionately replied, 'I am absolutely convinced that Ukraine will not shy away from the processes of expanding interaction with NATO and the Western allies as a whole.'"

"'Ukraine has its own relations with NATO; there is the Ukraine-NATO Council. At the end of the day, the decision is to be taken by NATO and Ukraine. It is a matter for those two partners.'” journalofdemocracy.org/what-putin-fea…

"A decade later, under President Medvedev, Russia and NATO were cooperating once again. At the 2010 NATO summit in Lisbon, Medvedev declared, the 'period of distance in our relations and claims against each other is over now.'"

"'We view the future with optimism and will work on developing relations between Russia and NATO in all areas … [as they progress toward] a full-fledged partnership.'"

"At that summit, he even floated the possibility of Russia-NATO cooperation on missile defense. Complaints about NATO expansion never arose."

"From the end of the Cold War until Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014, NATO in Europe was drawing down resources and forces, not building up. Even while expanding membership, NATO’s military capacity in Europe was much greater in the 1990s than in the 2000s."

"Putin believes [that] Russia has a right to veto the sovereign political decisions of its neighbors. Putin also demands exclusivity in his neighborhood: Russia can be the only great power to exercise such privilege (or even develop close ties) with these countries."

"So now, Putin has decided on a new strategy for ending Ukrainian democracy: massive military intervention. Putin claims that his purpose is to stop NATO expansion. But that’s a fiction. Nothing in the past year in Ukraine-NATO relations has changed."

Got that? Nothing changed.

"Putin may dislike NATO expansion, but he is not genuinely frightened by it. Russia has the largest army in Europe, now much more capable after two decades of lavish spending. NATO is a defensive alliance. It has never attacked the Soviet Union or Russia, and it never will."

"That undermines the Kremlin’s own regime stability and proposed rationale for autocratic state leadership. Just as Putin cannot allow the will of the Russian people to guide Russia’s future, he cannot allow the people of Ukraine..."

"...who have a shared culture and history, to choose the prosperous, independent, and free future that they have voted for and fought for."

Shorter: What changed?
Nothing. If anything, NATO became less of a threat to Russia than it had ever been.

Putin is terrified that the example of a free Ukraine could make Russians wonder why they put up with his shit.

The difference between NATO and Russia is that NATO has never threatened Russia in any meaningful way, which is more than you can say about Putin's attitude and actions toward its neighbors.

So drop the NATO shit. It's a pathetic argument, and it makes you look like a chump.

NATO has never forced anyone to join the alliance, but Soviet/Russian history is replete with exactly that sort of coercion.

I highly recommend this article, primarily for the background material on Russia's formerly sanguine attitude toward NATO, as well as for the insight as to just how much the power of a democratic example terrifies the pathetic psychopath in Moscow. journalofdemocracy.org/what-putin-fea…