US, NATO Deliver Written Responses to Russia’s Security Proposals

15 thoughts on “US, NATO Deliver Written Responses to Russia’s Security Proposals”

1. Can’t wait to see how Ray McGovern spins this complete rejection of Russia’s primary concerns.

   US offers no concessions in response to Russia on Ukraine
   https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-europe-russia-united-states-moscow-72856781c3b92640d03c5e954488ba90

   In separate written responses delivered to the Russians, the U.S. and NATO held firm to the alliance’s open-door policy for membership, rejected a demand to permanently ban Ukraine from joining, and said allied deployments of troops and military equipment in Eastern Europe are nonnegotiable.

   “There is no change, there will be no change,” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said. Also not up for negotiation will be the U.S. and European response to any Russian invasion of Ukraine, he said, repeating the mantra that any such incursion would be met with massive consequences and severe economic costs.

   The head of the Russian Duma committee on foreign relations stated the Us response was “unambiguously negative” and suggested that Russia would now start extensively arming the breakaway Ukraine republics. Andrei Martyanov said he warned about that for five years. Anyone want to see Iskander missiles and TOS thermobaric missile launchers in Donbass? It could be coming.

   1. Hi Richard:

      Forgive me for sounding repetitive but, does this situation have the possibility of escalating into a military conflict?

      1. If you mean Ukraine vs Russia, almost certainly. If you mean Russia vs NATO, that’s a risk if NATO inserts itself into a Ukraine conflict. But NATO (at least the military) knows they’re at a big disadvantage. If you mean Russia vs the US, fairly unlikely, again unless the US is dumb enough to insert itself, which supposedly Biden has already ruled out.

         How things go with regard to the overall problem of Cold War 2.0 is another matter. I can see that eventually turning hot. Cold War 1.0 almost got hot several times, and as others have said, Cold War 2.0 is worse because there is less respect for Russia’s capabilities by US politicians than there used to be in Cold War 1.0.

         1. Thank you for your assessment . I am, of course, concerned about all of the potentials… best-donna

         2. Thank you, very much, for sharing your insights.

         3. Thank you for your assessment. !

   2. These (re. Latin Am & Donbass) are both symmetrical, logical and expected; but, will they now move on Poland, Bulgaria, Roumania, Kosovo, Georgia, the Baltics?
      Given global hegemony is a fixed American mania wouldn’t such
      a strong move in Europe start the EU thinking of “non-alignment”, deGaul NATO? … turn the tables on Washington? … neutralize the SWIFT threat, and start the rest of the world thinking they too can kiss-off the hated Davos/Brussels gangsters?
      Otherwise, seems like we’re starting 1950 all over again.

      1. Good question. I guess it depend on what Russia decides to do vis-a-vis the NATO states that used to be Warsaw Pact. If NATO does nothing, then Russia will have to do something. My guess is Russia won’t do anything directly against those states militarily, except to position military assets to counter the threats from those states. Anything else risks open warfare with NATO and I don’t think Russia is willing to go there just yet. Depending on how NATO responds to Russia’s move, the future is an open question.

         1. Would a lightening strike surgically taking out strategic assets in one country, say Poland, -Biden’s “limited incursion”- likely qualify for an all out NATO response?

            1. I would expect so. But I’m also not sure that one member invoking Chapter 5 means that all members have to recognize that. Not up on NATO procedural rules. Presumably there would be discussion and a vote. If enough members are too scared to take Russia on, it might go nowhere. There would undoubtedly be a response, but it might not amount to a significant military one.

2. And here’s Russia’s response:

   Russia reveals US response to security proposals
   Moscow’s top diplomat has expressed disappointment over the long-awaited outcome of recent talks
   https://www.rt.com/russia/547491-russia-reveals-response-security-proposal/

   “The main issue is our clear position on the unacceptability of further NATO expansion to the East and the deployment of highly-destructive weapons that could threaten the territory of the Russian Federation,” Lavrov explained.

   According to Lavrov, the document promised by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken following talks last week in Switzerland failed to address these points.

   And the first baby steps are being taken by Russia:

   Russia unveils military plans in Cuba & Latin America
   Putin has agreed on a new collaboration with Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua
   https://www.rt.com/russia/547417-putin-military-plans-cuba/

3. Over in Brussels, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg also said the alliance’s doors will remain open. “We will not compromise on some core principles. And one of them is, of course, that every nation has the right to choose its own path,” he said.

   But, OF COURSE, those nations that happen to be on our shit list are not included. They can expect economy devastating sanctions and threats of military action up to and including the obligatory “all options on the table” threat.

4. Lavrov gives statement following US response to Moscow security demands (Update)
   http://thesaker.is/refeed-lavrov-gives-statement-following-us-response-to-moscow-security-demands/

   As for the essence of the document, the responses offer grounds for serious talks only on matters of secondary importance. There is no positive response to the main issue, which is our clear stand on the continued NATO enlargement towards the east and the deployment of strike weapons that can pose a threat to the territory of the Russian Federation, which we consider unacceptable…

   During my talks with Antony Blinken in Geneva, I asked him to explain why they regard the obligations made within the OSCE as a menu from which they are free to choose the dishes that taste good to them, and why they are disregarding or talking round their pledge to honour the interests of other countries. Mr Blinken did not reply to my question. He only shrugged his shoulders, and that’s it. I told him, just as I have told our other colleagues, that we would shortly send them an official request for an explanation why they choose only one of their commitments and disregard the other commitments on which its implementation depends. It will be an official request sent to all countries whose leaders signed the Istanbul and Astana declarations. I hope that it will not take them long to explain the Western position.

   Other than that, we are analysing the Americans’ response. As Antony
   Blinken has said, they have coordinated it with Ukraine and with the
   other Western countries, with US allies. We have also received NATO’s
   response from Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. We are analysing these two documents as a package, because they have been provided in response to the draft treaty and draft agreement we proposed in December 2021. After an inter-agency coordination of our conclusions, we will submit them to President Vladimir Putin, who will make a decision on our further actions.

5. Here’s the real Russian response if one reads between the lines. Use the CC button, then hit Settings to select English subtitles.

   This video covers the upcoming Russian whole fleet maneuvers in all the world’s oceans. This is apparently the first time the entire Russian fleet has been at sea since the Soviet Union days. Almost every ship except those in for repairs are going to sea, in positions where they could respond to a NATO attack. In particular six landing craft ships – apparently loaded down – three from one area and three from another – are moving to the Med – possibly headed for the Black Sea which would double the Russian Black Sea fleet capacity to conduct amphibious landing operations.

   The suggestion the video makes is that Russia is anticipating a NATO strike from the area of Poland or Ukraine.

   Shoigu and Gerasimov cause serious confusion in NATO (MUST WATCH!)

   http://thesaker.is/shoigu-and-gerasimov-cause-serious-confusion-in-nato-must-watch/

6. Hey, Ray McGovern! Here’s the US trying to “de-escalate” the situation.

   Russian diplomats told to leave US as tensions mount over Ukraine
   https://nypost.com/2022/01/26/russian-diplomats-told-to-leave-us-as-tensions-mount-over-ukraine/

   Washington tells Russian ambassador he might have to leave
   https://www.rt.com/russia/547459-ambssador-washington-leave-visa-row/

   And here’s Biden telling Zelensky that Russia *will* invade in February:

   Biden says he warned Ukraine’s President Zelensky during call to
   ‘prepare for impact’ and that Russian forces could ‘SACK Kiev’ – but
   White House denies any new action even as Fort Bragg’s 82nd Airborne
   waits on standby
   https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10449615/Biden-admin-warns-Russian-combat-forces-gathered-near-Ukraine-24-hours.html

   Yes, everything is just going alone swimmingly!

Comments are closed.