Eric Arnow
Sep 24, 2024
Duplicity in Negotiations: Nato Wants to Negotiate with Russia, but why?
The US/UK/Nato and their monkey’s paw Ukraine were sure that they would bring Russia to its knees by taking a hard line and refusing numerous Russian pleas for negotiation. Now, their plans are blowing up in their faces, and instead of Russia’s economy and war effort collapsing it’s theirs that is collapsing. NATO wants to negotiate with Russia. But should Russia trust its Russia hating adversaries’ new found request to negotiate?
The Collective West After Decades of Backstabbing, Now Wants Negotiations with Russia
Since the Crimean War, and especially since the 1917 Russian Revolution, the Soviet Union and then the Russian Federation has faced numerous examples of invasions, sanctions, and broken treaties, such as the 1918 food embargo and invasion of the new USSR, the initiation of the Cold War by Churchill and Truman, the broken promises post USSR not to expand Nato, the breaking of the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, the breaking of the INF treaty in 2019, and the Open Skies treaty, and the refusal of NATO to negotiate with Russia about a collective security agreement put forward by Russia in December 2021.
The Deliberate Failure to Implement the Minsk Agreements of 2014 and 2015.
For years, Russia has practically pleaded with NATO. Now that Russia intervened to preempt an invasion and ethnic cleansing of the Donbass in February 2022, and much to the chagrin of the Nato countries, the sanctions against Russia have failed along with NATO implicit support of Ukraine, suddenly the USA, UK and Germany and other NATO countries want to negotiate, after years of refusal to do so.
We’ll discuss the many broken promises, treaties and agreements by the West in its relations with the Soviet Union and with Russia. Now that Western leaders and especially Zelensky say that NATO wants to negotiate with Russia, should Russia trust such offers to negotiate in light of past broken promises.
From Its Beginnings, the Soviet Union and then Russian Federation have been undermined, attacked, betrayed by the “Collective West”–The USA, UK, various European countries, and even Japan. Indeed, Winston Churchill even used poison gas in the area of Northern Russia.
A staggering 50,000 M Devices were shipped to Russia: British aerial attacks using them began on 27 August 1919, targeting the village of Emtsa, 120 miles south of Archangel. Bolshevik soldiers were seen fleeing in panic as the green chemical gas drifted towards them. Those caught in the cloud vomited blood, then collapsed unconscious.The attacks continued throughout September on many Bolshevik-held villages: Chunova, Vikhtova, Pocha, Chorga, Tavoigor and Zapolki. But the weapons proved less effective than Churchill had hoped, partly because of the damp autumn weather. By September, the attacks were halted then stopped.Two weeks later the remaining weapons were dumped in the White Sea. They remain on the seabed to this day in 40 fathoms of water.
A Pattern of Failed or Broken Agreements
The geopolitical relationship between the West and Russia (formerly the Soviet Union) has indeed been marked by a series of broken promises, treaties, and agreements. This has left Russia highly skeptical of Western overtures for negotiation. Let’s break down some of these key moments in history, starting from the Soviet Union’s time and moving into contemporary relations with the Russian Federation.
### 1. World War II Promises and Post-War Rearrangements
In the aftermath of World War II, the Soviet Union found itself in a tenuous relationship with its wartime allies, the U.S. and the U.K. Stalin’s USSR had suffered tremendous losses, and the Soviets were promised a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe under the Yalta Agreement. The post-war order, however, saw the rapid emergence of tension between East and West.
### 2. The Initiation of the Cold War
Many Russian historians cite Winston Churchill’s 1946 “Iron Curtain” speech and U.S. President Harry Truman’s anti-Soviet stance as key moments that triggered the Cold War. The West’s efforts to contain the spread of communism created a deep division between the superpowers, culminating in the formation of NATO in 1949. From Russia’s perspective, NATO was initially presented as a defensive alliance against any potential Soviet aggression, but it quickly became seen as a direct threat to its security.
### 3. Broken NATO Promises on Expansion (1990s)
A major point of contention for Russia has been NATO’s eastward expansion. In 1990, during discussions on German reunification, Western leaders promised Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand “one inch eastward” beyond Germany. Despite this, NATO expanded several times after the collapse of the Soviet Union, incorporating many former Warsaw Pact countries, including Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic (1999), and later the Baltic states (2004). Russia has viewed this expansion as a betrayal and a security threat, exacerbating its mistrust toward the West.
### 4. The ABM Treaty (1972-2002)
The Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, signed in 1972, was a cornerstone of Cold War arms control efforts between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. It limited the development of missile defense systems, ensuring that both sides remained vulnerable to mutual nuclear deterrence. However, in 2002, the U.S. unilaterally withdrew from the treaty under President George W. Bush, citing the need to develop missile defenses against potential rogue states like North Korea and Iran. This decision alarmed Russia, which saw it as undermining strategic stability. For Moscow, the treaty’s dissolution was yet another instance of a broken agreement by the West.
### 5. The INF Treaty (1987-2019)
The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, signed in 1987, eliminated an entire class of nuclear and conventional missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. It was one of the most significant arms control treaties of the Cold War. In 2019, the U.S. withdrew from the treaty under the Trump administration, citing Russia’s alleged violations related to missile development. Russia, in turn, accused the U.S. of non-compliance as well, particularly regarding the deployment of missile defense systems in Eastern Europe. This withdrawal removed another key element of nuclear stability and increased tensions between the two powers.
### 6. The Minsk Agreements (2014-2015)
The Minsk Agreements were aimed at ending the conflict in Eastern Ukraine, following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the outbreak of fighting in the Donbass region. These agreements, signed by Ukraine, Russia, and the OSCE, with France and Germany acting as mediators, outlined a ceasefire, withdrawal of heavy weapons, and political reforms to give greater autonomy to the Donbass region. However, implementation was halting and incomplete. Russia accused Ukraine of failing to grant the promised autonomy to Donbass, while Ukraine and the West blamed Russia for continuing to support separatists in the region. The failure to implement the Minsk Agreements further fueled the conflict and deepened distrust between Russia and the West.
### 7. The Open Skies Treaty (2002-2020)
The Open Skies Treaty, which allowed unarmed surveillance flights over the territories of its participants, was another post-Cold War confidence-building measure. The U.S. withdrew from this treaty in 2020, citing Russian violations of the treaty’s provisions. Russia denied these accusations and responded by announcing its own withdrawal in 2021. The demise of the treaty marked another step backward in terms of arms control and transparency.
### 8. The 2021 Collective Security Proposal and Refusal to Negotiate
In December 2021, Russia presented the U.S. and NATO with proposals for a new security framework that would halt NATO expansion, roll back military deployments in Eastern Europe, and establish a non-aggression pact. However, NATO countries rejected these demands, stating that they were non-negotiable and that each country had the right to choose its alliances. Russia’s subsequent intervention in Ukraine in February 2022 was, in part, a response to the perceived failure of the West to address its security concerns.
### 9. Russia’s Perception of Broken Promises and the Current Conflict
### 10. ** 2019 Rand Corporation Report: “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia”
Now, Kiev Changes Its Mind and Wants to Negotiate
After categorically breaking its agreement with Russia in April, 2022, to have a cease fire, Zelensky facing stark defeat plans, to invite Russia to a new Peace Summit.
Given this history of broken promises and unilateral actions by the West, it is unsurprising that Russian leadership, under President Vladimir Putin, is deeply skeptical of current offers for negotiation. From the Russian perspective, NATO’s expansion and its refusal to negotiate over Russia’s security concerns have contributed to the current crisis in Ukraine. Russia preempted Ukraine, heavily armed and trained following the US sponsored coup in Kiev in 2014, in its move to continue and amplify its attacks on the Russian speaking populations in the Donbass and planned ethnic cleansing. This has led to Russians characterizing the United States as being “Nonagreement Capable” (literal translation from Russian)
Conclusion: Russia Will Not Negotiate with Terrorists
The attack on the Kursk region, which included atrocities against civilians eliminates the possibility of negotiations.
Please consider visiting my stores to find items to spread the word about Peace and Enlightenment
