You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
Russia must join with West, says Nato chief
2007-07-24
Somehow I don't think Putin will be pursuaded, unfortunately.
Russia should abandon its "confrontational" rhetoric and join the Western allies to combat the common threats of terrorism and failed states, the secretary-general of Nato said yesterday.

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the former Dutch foreign minister who has led the organisation since 2004, told The Daily Telegraph that "nobody wants a new Cold War, neither the Russians nor Nato, nobody".

Yet the actions and rhetoric of President Vladimir Putin's regime have consciously revived echoes of Cold War confrontation. Last week, Russia "suspended" its adherence to the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, a crucial agreement which restricts the deployment of troops and tanks on European soil. Earlier this year, Russia threatened to target nuclear missiles on Europe and Mr Putin has publicly questioned the value of the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty of 1987, which forms another cornerstone of Western security.

Much of Europe is heavily dependent on Russian supplies of natural gas and Mr Putin has shown himself willing to use this leverage. Both Ukraine and Georgia have seen their energy supplies disrupted after offending Moscow.

But Mr de Hoop Scheffer said that Russia was still a "partner" of Nato and there was no alternative to dialogue. "I'm very much in favour of engaging and investing in this partnership. It's not always easy because on missile defence, on Kosovo and on the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty we have rather fundamental differences of opinion," he said. "It is important that we fight together the faceless common threat of terrorism. We both have to fight nuclear proliferation, we both have to fight failed and failing states. The threats and challenges that we are faced with in 2007 and beyond are not basically different in Moscow than they are in Washington, Paris, London or The Hague and Brussels.

"That is the reason why I argue that there are not many alternatives - except for confrontation. And who gains from confrontation? No one."

Mr de Hoop Scheffer added that Russia's "confrontational tone" was "unhelpful". "I think we should conduct our diplomacy without the megaphone," he said. "There is no need for further public rhetoric and it is not helpful either."

Russia's key grievance against Nato is the alliance's expansion to include Moscow's satellite states of the Cold War era. Today, Nato has 26 members, including the former Soviet republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania which border Russia. But Mr de Hoop Scheffer said that Russia's fears were groundless. "The perception is that Nato as an organisation is coming closer and closer to their borders. Why should you be worried about the rule of law and democracy coming closer towards your borders? There's no reason for Russia to be worried. But again, that perception should be taken seriously."

Russia has also objected to America's plans to station a missile defence shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. This triggered Mr Putin's threat to target Russia's nuclear arsenal on Europe. Mr de Hoop Scheffer pointed out that America plans to station only 10 interceptor missiles in Poland and one radar station in the Czech Republic. This would have no impact on Russia's military capabilities, he said, and Moscow's fears were "unfounded quite honestly".

Negotiations in an "atmosphere of openness and frankness" were the only means to address these issues, said the Nato chief. But he added that "we have some tough nuts to crack".
Posted by:lotp

#5  The entire point of NATO was to check the Russians in Europe by extending the US "nuclear umbrella" there. If we allow Russia to join NATO, what are they going to do, nuke themselves?
Posted by: mojo   2007-07-24 12:37  

#4  As a measure of good faith, they can stop providing military hardware and technology to the ChiComs, Iran, etc. etc...

Not holding my breath though....

I agree that they should be part of NATO, per McZoid, sans access to our more valuable military equipment.

To paraphrase: "Keep your friends closer, but your potential enemies closer."; Forgive my pessimism.
Posted by: Delphi   2007-07-24 08:19  

#3  I am a supporter of including Russia in NATO. They don't meet current requirements. That can change. But a return to Cold War confrontation would be catastrophic.
Posted by: McZoid   2007-07-24 06:27  

#2  WAFF.com > IRAN desires to purchase up to 250 advanced aircraft from Russia, possibly including SU-30MK's.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2007-07-24 05:39  

#1  Combat failed states? Great - start with Bosnia & Hercegovina...
Posted by: Matt K.   2007-07-24 01:10  

00:00