5 ms·
> the US broke a promise to the USSR of not expanding NATO There is literally zero evidence of that, except claims by the Russian propaganda itself. People wh
by hkpack 3y ago
> the US broke a promise to the USSR of not expanding NATO
There is literally zero evidence of that, except claims by the Russian propaganda itself.
People who live in totalitarian countries (like Russia, where ruler is in a power for a lifetime), seems to not understand that democracies don't do promises, because leaders changes frequently, and any promise without written agreement is just plain impossible except very short term.
So you are using an instance of internal russian lie and propaganda to "hate US imperialism and propaganda", and don't see it yourself.
- flurdy 3y agoThere possibly was an "understanding" with the USSR not to expand eastward when the Soviet union was around but when the USSR dissolved that "promise" made no sense anymore.
- 4gotunameagain 3y agoNational Security Archive at George Washington University: Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner You're welcome. https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017... All of your comments are suspiciously related to US foreign policy issues btw ;)
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jacobwilliamroy 3y agoI want to see more countries join NATO. NATO is just a cool idea. Having the militaries from 31 countries all under one command structure. I genuinely would like to see them try.
- sidewndr46 3y agoI don't understand why people think this. NATO does not mandate a unified command structure. France pulled out in 1966. It didn't rejoin until the 21st century.
- jacobwilliamroy 3y agoI just assumed that's one of the things NATO did. I haven't actually read the treaty. I probably should.
- chelical 3y agoI don't get why this line is repeated so much. Verbal agreements and reassurances in the realm of foreign policy are essentially worthless, especially when you're dealing with democratically elected leaders. Unless you have a formal agreement the next president or prime minister has to abide by, there is no continuity. This expansion argument also ignores that Eastern European countries are joining NATO of their own accord. Btw Russia and the US also signed the Budapest memorandum to respect Ukraine's sovereignty.
- sidewndr46 3y agoBut the president of the US doesn't have the power to make treaties with another nation. See the league of nations for an important example of that. So that treaty is also worthless when it comes to the US. So if a verbal agreement is worthless & a treaty is worthless, how does one negotiate with the US? I'm unsure how France's presidential system works and what authority he may have.