This says it all IMO

1 Like

And each and every one of those countries are fairly recently joined members of the EU so if NATO was ditched and an EU army formed we’d be in the exact same position.

This craziness isn’t about the security of Russia just yet more muscle flexing from it’s bonkers leader who revels in the panic he’s causing, the demands he’s made can never be agreed to as it would be huge move backwards for the security of Western Europe.

I’m amazed that as a proud European you are effectively siding with Putin.

3 Likes

These countries had no possibility of joining Nato, as you very well know.
Is anyone paying you for this?

But they have? Don’t understand.

To understand Russia’s claims of betrayal, it is necessary to review the reassurances then US secretary of state James A. Baker made to former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev during a meeting on February 9, 1990. In a discussion on the status of a reunited Germany, the two men agreed that NATO would not extend past the territory of East Germany, a promise repeated by NATO’s secretary general in a speech on May 17 that same year in Brussels.

But Tim, you have to admit if you were sitting in the Kremlin it doesn’t look good. I’m not saying the odious Putin is right, I’m saying we shouldn’t be surprised he’s throwing his toys out of the pram.

Russia and NATO signed the Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security in 1997 which in effect didn’t forbid NATO expansion after the break-up of the Warsaw Pact on the understanding that NATO wouldn’t permanently station military forces or nuclear weapons in any new NATO member countries, for it’s part Russia agreed not to expand beyond it’s current border.

Putin conveniently never mentions that agreement preferring of course to go back to 1990 when the Russian state was far larger and the thought of eastward NATO expansion wasn’t ever discussed and he also ignores the annexing of the Crimea in 2014.

Johnson’s boys keep stoking the fire…….

While he tries to find somebody that will talk to him….

I guess there will always be a lot of would have, should have, could have stuff but IMHO Russia feels threatened and after the Iraq lies I will never trust the Americans again. It seems to me (and the president of Ukraine :thinking:) that it’s the US and UK (deja vu) who are banging their drums. This could all end horribly, just like Iraq did. .

2 Likes

Is this the solution……

“ Ukraine’s ambassador in London, Vadym Prystaiko, suggested to the BBC earlier that Kyiv “might” consider shelving its Nato plans if “pushed to it”.”

Hasn’t he just been made to backtrack on that by the Ukraine president?

How about telling Putin that Nato cannot rule out Ukraine membership, or Russian membership either? :thinking:

Yes, Just saw that David. One step forward…… But it came as a surprise to me that NATO membership is enshrined in their constitution. No wonder Putin is jumping up and down. Time for a good dose of Realpolitik.

And about Russian membership? If Turkey and Greece can both be members. :thinking:

Could be interesting, for the US, if Japan made to (re)claim Sakhalin. :rofl:

Never going to happen. The JDF exists purely for the defence of the Japanese Home Islands and the White House would throw a major hissy fit if the JDF even hinted at carrying out offensive operations.

Germany has the same clause in the constitution. Defence of homeland only - but every time there is a conflict the USA and the UK throw a ‘hissy fit’ and declare Germany is not doing enough…

Germany hasn’t met it’s defence spending targets in years and featured the only troops deployed to Afghanistan as part of the ISAF to gain weight as they weren’t allowed outside the wire for fear of German casualties.

Germany has reluctantly agreed to supply troops to the silly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - to be purely logistical and humanitarian support. German troops are NOT allowed to actively serve outside German borders…
If they gain weight whilst sitting it out - so be it. Rather have them at home defending Germany than some non existing Weapons of Mass Distruction…
Also - why should Germany spend more than absolutely necessary? Only to be accused of warmongering - as in ’ remember WW’2 by certain british media and politicians?

2 Likes

Because that level of spending was agreed across NATO?

Germany is not the only NATO member that underspends… but 65 billion is not too shabby.
But it always is a good target for either side.

That was not the case on the World at One today Tim. Around 15:40 in a very different picture was painted. And, of course, the maps speak for themselves.

1 Like