NATO HARKING BACK TO THE PAST

Abstract

(By Andrei Zolotov. Rossiiskaya gazeta, May 31, 2016, p. 14. Complete text:) Editors’ Note. - leadership has suspended practical cooperation with Russia. What is going on between Moscow and - does this signal the stabilization of confrontation, escalation or some other trend? At present, in its relations with the alliance, Moscow does not have a positive agenda and, as Russia’s permanent representative to Aleksandr Grushko explained in an interview with Rossiiskaya gazeta, there are no indications that countries are ready to reevaluate their current policy. ... * * * ... Question. - You see no grounds for optimism, so what kind of future awaits us? ... Answer. - The downward trend in relations is not over yet. Judging from the recent foreign ministers’ meeting, the alliance continues its policy of deterring Russia, despite its own calls for political dialogue. I’m not saying that our relations with are in a state of war, but the alliance is switching to security schemes from cold war days. And this is alarming, because today it is not only about policies, but also about military organizational development. Policies are acquiring some very real contours, and the numerous measures that the US and its European allies are taking today consolidate this confrontational model. And this model will, in turn, influence future policy. ... Today, is trying to bring confrontation to the Black Sea region. Not long ago, Turkish President RecepTayyip Erdogan stated that the Black Sea must not be allowed to turn into a Russian lake. However, understands very well that the Black Sea will never turn into a NATO lake, and we will take all necessary measures to neutralize possible threats and attempts to put military pressure on Russia from the south. I should also add that our Black Sea Fleet was closely integrated into international efforts to stabilize the situation in the Mediterranean and further south. Inparticular, fleetforceswere actively involved in operations to fight piracy in conjunction with and the European Union. NowNATOhasabandonedthis [practice]. ... Q. - Amid growing tensions, are there enough mechanisms to prevent accidental conflicts? Howeffective arethehotlinesandothermechanisms? ... A. - In recent decades, the international community, [in particular] European countries, have created within the framework of theOrganization for Security and Cooperation in Europe an advanced system of arms control tools - measures that make it possible to prevent or neutralize the danger of unintended military incidents and other mechanisms, including hotlines between military officials. The Russian Federation has signed a whole number of bilateral agreements, including with several countries. They have proved their worth, in particular, in Russia-Norway relations. And they are still quite effective in northern Europe. ... The degree of security in Europe will be determined not only by whether we manage to defuse the current situation in relations ... between and Russia, but also by whether we can establish truly collective cooperation in countering common security threats. Here, the situation appears more encouraging, because pragmatic interests are prevailing. And we see that despite attempts to use an organization like as a tool to isolate Russia, we are actually seeing cooperation on key international problems and issues developing in other formats. This [refers to] the Middle East quartet, the International Syria Support Group and the Normandy format [France, Germany, Ukraine, Russia]. The list goes on. This is why countries that are involved in these efforts and are ready to cooperate with Russia on a genuinely collective basis - on the basis of equality with respect for our legitimate security interests - evidently should readjust accordingly the policy of the organizations of which are members. Here, I mean not only NATO, but also the EU. ... Q. - Why is not ready for dialogue with Russia? Is the [annexation of] the Crimea [see Current Digest, Vol. 66, No. 12, pp. 3 - 11] the only reason? ... A. - The ongoing processes should be viewed above all in terms of the geopolitical interests of the countries concerned. And this analysis shows that the Ukraine crisis was used as a pretext for an abrupt turnaround in NATO’s policy and military buildup. I don’t want to indulge in conspiracy theories but, again, a sober analysis indicates that feels extremely uncomfortable in the absence of a major opponent. ... All operations has conducted since the end of the war era have had negative results - both in the Balkans and in Libya. countries bear direct responsibility for the destruction of Iraq. What we are seeing today in the Middle East and North Africa is the emergence of vast territories controlled by all kinds of terrorists and extremists - all of this is to a very large degree the result of activity.