In a pair of draft treaty documents, Russia demanded that NATO provide written guarantees that it would halt its expansion and assure Russia that neither Ukraine nor Georgia ever be offered membership into the alliance.
In a speech delivered after Russia's demands were delivered, Putin declared that if the U.S. and its allies continue their "obviously aggressive stance," Russia would take "appropriate retaliatory military-technical measures," adding that it has "every right to do so."
In short, Putin made it clear that, when it came to the issue of Ukrainian membership in NATO, the stationing of U.S. missiles in Poland and Romania, and NATO deployments in Eastern Europe, Russia felt that its very existence was being threatened.
The Disconnect
The Russian invasion of Ukraine, when seen from the perspective of Russia and its leadership, was the result of a lengthy encroachment by NATO on the legitimate national security interests of the Russian state and people.
The West, however, has interpreted the military incursion as little more than the irrational action of an angry, isolated dictator, desperately seeking relevance in a world slipping out of his control.
The disconnect between these two narratives could prove fatal to the world. By downplaying the threat Russia perceives, both from an expanding NATO, and the provision of lethal military assistance to Ukraine, while Russia is engaged in military operations it deems critical to its national security, the U.S. and NATO run the risk of failing to comprehend the deadly seriousness of Putin's instructions to his military leaders regarding the elevation of the level of readiness on the part of Russia's strategic nuclear forces.
Far from reflecting the irrational whim of a desperate man, Putin's orders reflected the logical extension of a concerted Russian national security posture, years in the making, where the geopolitical opposition to NATO expansion into Ukraine, was married with strategic nuclear posture. Every statement Putin has made over the course of this crisis has been tied to this policy.
While the U.S. and NATO can debate the legitimacy of the Russian concerns, to dismiss the national security strategy of a nation that has been subjected to detailed bureaucratic vetting, as nothing more than the temper tantrum of an out of touch autocrat, represents a dangerous disregard of reality, the consequences of which could prove to be fatal to the U.S., NATO, and the world.
President Putin has often complained that the West does not listen to him when he speaks of issues Russia deems to be of critical importance to its national security. The West is listening now. The question is, is it capable of comprehending the seriousness of the situation?
So far the answer seems to be no.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
