VLADIMIR PUTIN PROPOSES ELIMINATING NATO

Abstract

(By Oleg Odnokolenko. Nezavisimaya gazeta, June 23, 2016, p. 1. Complete text:) Speaking Wednesday [June 22] in the State Duma at session timed to coincide with the anniversary of the start of [Russia’s entry into] World War II, [Russian President] Vladimir Putin all but explicitly said that the historical time of the last remaining military-political bloc (i.e., NATO) had expired. In his opinion, must create modern collective security system without blocs and with all countries on an equal footing. ... It has been said before that NATO is rudiment of the cold war. Back in the early ’90s, after the Warsaw Pact voluntarily dissolved under the pressure of irreversible circumstances, there was hope that NATO, no longer facing probable adversary, would at the very least reorganize, if hang up its hat. But as we know, that didn’t happen. Moreover, due to the accession of former Soviet allies in Eastern Europe and number of former Soviet republics, the alliance has significantly expanded geographically and militarily - in essence, it has substantially bulked up. Unfortunately, its geopolitical orientation has changed: Whatever is said about the Iranian nuclear threat and the nuclear insanity of the leader of North Korea is just diversion: NATO’s entire infrastructure is de facto clearly focused on the eastern strategic direction - i.e., Russia. ... Moreover, this process didn’t happen all at once but over the past 25 years, beginning the day after the cold war was declared over. However, Brussels and Washington apparently use completely different calendar. For some reason, they trace the process back to the Yugoslav events, nor to the decision to deploy elements of an American strategic missile defense system in Europe and definitely to the advance of NATO military infrastructure right up to Russia’s borders; instead, they trace it exclusively to the events in Ukraine, somehow forgetting that [what happened in] the Crimea and the Donetsk Basin was merely response from Moscow. ... Indeed, previously, out of false diplomatic modesty, the Kremlin somehow sought to take restrained approach to the new crusade. But when the flight time of NATO planes and cruise missiles to Moscow became equal to the length of break between school classes, perfectly appropriate response followed. And now NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg says with some trepidation: [We are seeing] a more assertive Russia in the east which has tripled its defense spending***since 2000, which has invested heavily in new and more modern equipment. ... But what else could you expect in this situation? is most curious is that some other reaction was in fact expected. As Vladimir Putin said during briefing at the St. Petersburg [International] Economic Forum [see the first feature in this issue, above], by the mid-1990s, the West was confident that Russia was virtually done for as sovereign (according to Stoltenberg, overconfident) nation, and that Moscow had forever lost the opportunity to restore its defense capabilities. That was precisely why the US unilaterally withdrew from the Antiballistic Missile Treaty and initiated an easing of the requirements of strategic offensive weapons agreements. ... But, as it turns out, rumors about the degradation of the Russian military-industrial complex were greatly exaggerated. Our nuclear deterrent, be it the Strategic Missile Forces or the Navy, has been equipped with next-generation systems that the West has no burning desire to experience firsthand. ... As matter of fact, the combat capabilities of Russia’s new weapons have become hot-button issue for the Europeans. Jens Stoltenberg, when asked on the air by Radio Liberty/Radio Free Europe to comment on the possibility of [Russia’s] stationing of nuclear-armed Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad Province, replied seemingly irritably that he would not comment on intelligence information. But he said it in way that made everything perfectly clear: The West doesn’t rule anything out now. ... We note that NG has no specific information about this, either. But some in Europe have become very aware that Western strategists have overplayed their political intelligence and military superiority. One of those who have just now seen the light is German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who recently said: What we shouldn’t do now is to inflame the situation by loud saber-rattling and shrill war cries. Those who believe symbolic tank parades on the alliance’s eastern border will bring more security are mistaken. ... These words are significant when you consider that Mr. Steinmeier is no great friend of Russia, but he is apparently a more sensible politician than Secretary General Stoltenberg, whom few people had heard of until he was appointed to the top post in the alliance. Also noteworthy is that the tone of Western rhetoric started to noticeably change after Russian Chief of the General Staff Gen.