'Trusting NATO Is Meaningless, as They Have an Entirely Different Perspective on Life'

There has never been trust between NATO and Russia.

The International Conference on European Security is taking place in Moscow. It is no secret that our country and her Western partners have accumulated a number of issues directly related to the issue of “security.” These include the creation of the European missile defense system, the relationship between Russia and NATO, the problem of conventional arms control and much more.

Political analyst Sergei Mikheev gave his opinions on the current relations between Russia and NATO.

Russia has already stopped the movement of NATO to the east.

There has never been any trust between NATO and Russia. It seems to me that NATO has always continued to treat Russia as a potential enemy, and that the policy of widening the organization eastwards clearly demonstrates this. With its new members, NATO is trying to create a zone, which will divide “scary Russia” from “old Europe.” They say that we do not trust them; that is true, but we have never had any trust at all. We have also learned over the years that trusting NATO is meaningless, as they have an entirely different perspective on life.

These diplomatic phrases are camouflaging one simple thing: Our positions continue to be mismatched. The root of this mismatching is the American position. It is possible that we would be able to come to an agreement with Europe, if it were not for the Americans and their new allies in the form of former Soviet states. I am sure that American influence in Europe will cause the conflict between Russia and Europe to be reproduced. Americans understand that if Europe and Russia were to agree, then America would no longer be needed in Europe, or, at the very least, her role would become less significant. If Russia does not pose a threat to Europe and vice versa, then why would American bases be needed?

Russia has already stopped NATO’s eastward move. If it were not for Moscow’s principled position, I think that NATO would have expanded to include Ukraine and Georgia, and would have become more active in Belarus. Waking up from the ‘90s, Russia has taken a tough position on NATO enlargement, but not the fact that the Alliance has abandoned its plans.

In some regions, America cannot ignore Russia.

Let us not underestimate our capabilities. We have leverage. For what reason did Russia not allow Western troops to enter Syria? We are not fighting there; we have no troops there. It was because of our political weight and the very real role that we continue to play in this world. Of course, this role is not quite yet of a global nature, but in some regions, America cannot ignore Russia. In the case of Libya, where Russia has been silent — and silence is a form of agreement — the West swallowed Libya and choked. But now Russia and China are saying “no,” and the Americans do not dare get involved in Syria.

Will Ukraine become a part of NATO? For that to happen, she would need to change her constitution, which establishes the country as a non-aligned state. In order to change the constitution, there would have to be a referendum; I think that this would cause a deep divide within Ukrainian society. But the pro-Western policy of Ukraine, as well as NATO itself, will change the views of society year after year, so that the time for the referendum will become ripe. In the next 10 years this is impossible, but in 20 years it may become a reality.