3 ms·

Soviet leadership, including Gorbachev himself, have explicitly denied that any assurances existed. As regards Gorbachev -- what did he say actually, and when?

Soviet leadership, including Gorbachev himself, have explicitly denied that any assurances existed. As regards Gorbachev -- what did he say actually, and when? And why would he say the exact opposite in his RBTH interview in 2014? (Granted, this is RBTH -- but I think we can be reasonably confident that the interview is not a fabrication and that he is being quoted correctly). Here's his quote again, in full context - and it's clear he's not not referring to the Common European Home: The decision for the U.S. and its allies to expand NATO into the east was decisively made in 1993. I called this a big mistake from the very beginning. It was definitely a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990. With regards to Germany, they were legally enshrined and are being observed.

chrysler 3y ago
My quote is from the same interview. I repeat: "The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years." If that interview leaves anything unclear, then Spiegel tried to get a "yes, assurances existed" answer from foreign minister Shevardnadze from several different angles, but he replied to every attempt with a "No." Spiegel: https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/interview-with-eduard-shevardnadze-we-couldn-t-believe-that-the-warsaw-pact-could-be-dissolved-a-663595.html https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/interview-with-e...
- lisasays 3y ago
  Mmm -- my sense is that you're also "arranging scraps" here to get them to line up and support the narrative that you like. By my reading, Gorbachev's later statement -- "definitely a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990" (referring to NATO's decisive steps towards expansion starting in 1993) -- is more holistic, and seals the matter. Not that there was "conspiracy" to hoodwink the Soviets from the beginning, per your straw-man argument. But still -- against the spirit of the statements and assurances made at the time, 'twas. Shevardnadze's statements might seem to contradict this, but not really -- Shevardnadze is focusing on the details; Gorbachev is talking about the bigger, "moral" picture if you will.
  - chrysler 3y ago
    And that's why I call it a conspiracy theory - it relies on a small number of select snippets, interpreted in the most favorable way possible, ignoring things like explicit statements to the opposite from the very same sources. A textbook example of conspiratorial thinking. The facts are simple: 1. Possible NATO status of Warsaw Pact countries was never discussed. 2. There was no assurance from NATO to Soviet Union on possible NATO status of Warsaw Pact countries. 3. Key members of the Soviet leadership explicitly deny any such assurances. 4. Russia never brought up any such assurances when Warsaw Pact countries joined NATO. 5. Russia and NATO signed a treaty greenlighting NATO enlargement before any official talks with Warsaw Pact countries started. What was discussed in 1990: 1. Integration of East German military into NATO structures. 2. Size and composition of German military after reunification. 3. Placement of NATO forces (that is, from the US, UK, and elsewhere) in East Germany. This has nothing to do with NATO status of Warsaw Pact countries. Placement of NATO troops (discussed) and potential members of NATO (not discussed) should not be confused.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - lisasays 3y ago
      Russia and NATO signed a treaty greenlighting NATO enlargement before any official talks with Warsaw Pact countries started. Which can't possibly be the CFE - so which treaty (and which specific provisions of that treaty) are you referring to? Your notion of "conspiracy theory" is plainly at odds with the commonly accepted definition of the term, BTW. But we'll move past that for now.
      - chrysler 3y ago
        I am referring to the 1997 Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation. It was signed in May 1997 during NATO summit in Paris. At the next summit in July, the first former Warsaw Pact countries were invited into NATO. Official negotiations began in September. I see no conflicts with commonly accepted definitions of conspiracy theory: "a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators" (Merriam-Webster). How did former Warsaw Pact countries end up in NATO? According to conventional understanding, former Warsaw Pact countries seeked political, economic and military security through cooperation in international organizations ranging from Council of Europe to NATO. According to the conspiracy theory, NATO and Russia made a secret deal to divide Europe, but the USA did not keep their side of the deal, intentionally misled Russia and forced Warsaw Pact countries into NATO in order to encircle, attack and destroy Russia.

chrysler 3y ago

My quote is from the same interview. I repeat: "The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years." If that interview leaves anything unclear, then Spiegel tried to get a "yes, assurances existed" answer from foreign minister Shevardnadze from several different angles, but he replied to every attempt with a "No." Spiegel: https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/interview-with-eduard-shevardnadze-we-couldn-t-believe-that-the-warsaw-pact-could-be-dissolved-a-663595.html https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/interview-with-e...

lisasays 3y ago
Mmm -- my sense is that you're also "arranging scraps" here to get them to line up and support the narrative that you like. By my reading, Gorbachev's later statement -- "definitely a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990" (referring to NATO's decisive steps towards expansion starting in 1993) -- is more holistic, and seals the matter. Not that there was "conspiracy" to hoodwink the Soviets from the beginning, per your straw-man argument. But still -- against the spirit of the statements and assurances made at the time, 'twas. Shevardnadze's statements might seem to contradict this, but not really -- Shevardnadze is focusing on the details; Gorbachev is talking about the bigger, "moral" picture if you will.
- chrysler 3y ago
  And that's why I call it a conspiracy theory - it relies on a small number of select snippets, interpreted in the most favorable way possible, ignoring things like explicit statements to the opposite from the very same sources. A textbook example of conspiratorial thinking. The facts are simple: 1. Possible NATO status of Warsaw Pact countries was never discussed. 2. There was no assurance from NATO to Soviet Union on possible NATO status of Warsaw Pact countries. 3. Key members of the Soviet leadership explicitly deny any such assurances. 4. Russia never brought up any such assurances when Warsaw Pact countries joined NATO. 5. Russia and NATO signed a treaty greenlighting NATO enlargement before any official talks with Warsaw Pact countries started. What was discussed in 1990: 1. Integration of East German military into NATO structures. 2. Size and composition of German military after reunification. 3. Placement of NATO forces (that is, from the US, UK, and elsewhere) in East Germany. This has nothing to do with NATO status of Warsaw Pact countries. Placement of NATO troops (discussed) and potential members of NATO (not discussed) should not be confused.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - lisasays 3y ago
    Russia and NATO signed a treaty greenlighting NATO enlargement before any official talks with Warsaw Pact countries started. Which can't possibly be the CFE - so which treaty (and which specific provisions of that treaty) are you referring to? Your notion of "conspiracy theory" is plainly at odds with the commonly accepted definition of the term, BTW. But we'll move past that for now.
    - chrysler 3y ago
      I am referring to the 1997 Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation. It was signed in May 1997 during NATO summit in Paris. At the next summit in July, the first former Warsaw Pact countries were invited into NATO. Official negotiations began in September. I see no conflicts with commonly accepted definitions of conspiracy theory: "a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators" (Merriam-Webster). How did former Warsaw Pact countries end up in NATO? According to conventional understanding, former Warsaw Pact countries seeked political, economic and military security through cooperation in international organizations ranging from Council of Europe to NATO. According to the conspiracy theory, NATO and Russia made a secret deal to divide Europe, but the USA did not keep their side of the deal, intentionally misled Russia and forced Warsaw Pact countries into NATO in order to encircle, attack and destroy Russia.