NATO is not necessary

Geopolitics is a serious discipline, it is impossible to ignore it with all the desire, says the Mackinder-Haushofer tablets about the eternal struggle between sea and land civilizations. Here we are watching it. West is West, East is East, Rudyard Kipling outlined the thesis in a popular version. Russia in this construction is rather the East. Therefore, there is no reason to be surprised at the strained relations with Western structures, especially with such brutal, forceful ones as NATO. This is the norm.

The Russian Foreign Ministry, having suspended from November 1 the work of our mission to NATO in Brussels, as well as the military liaison mission and the information bureau of the military bloc in Moscow, has merely recorded the political reality. There is no trace of rapprochement with the Old World. Sergei Lavrov recently announced an unprecedented cooling of relations with the EU. With America, some points of contact have been outlined, but it is clearly too early to talk about a breakthrough. Well, if so, then there is no need to keep a mission with an alliance for joint work, which does not exist.

In fact, the institution of Russia's permanent representation in NATO is a sign of the largest (according to Putin) geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century - the collapse of the USSR. Having weakened and, possibly, morally surrendered, our big country a year before the collapse took care of a "dialogue" with a recent adversary. The functions of a representative, so as not to inflate the apparatus, were given to the ambassador in Brussels. For some time the brilliant Vitaly Churkin was the permanent representative. But since 2018, there has been no permanent representative in Brussels - they recalled. Now the form has finally matched the content.

Moscow has already shown remarkable patience, giving NATO a chance to improve. Backlash in three years is a sufficient time for correcting errors. However, in Brussels they preferred an aggravation. The bloc's initiative to reduce our mission from 20 to ten people cannot be called otherwise. The reasoning that Western diplomats dumped in the media is wild: "... in response to alleged hostile activities, including murder and espionage." The previous unilateral reduction from 30 to 20 employees was completely justified by the “Skripal case”.

These contrived reasons are just a consequence of a fundamental event that happened earlier. It should be remembered that the original decision to suspend military and civil cooperation with Russia was made by the NATO Council on April 1, 2014. This was a reaction to the referendum on the reunification of Crimea with Russia. It seems that the West needed constant contacts between NATO and Russia only as a kind of cover for a military-political attack on our country. When it was thwarted, it did not work to strangle Russia in its arms, the secret became apparent.

This offensive is happening right now.

The head of the Pentagon, Lloyd Austin, arrived in Kiev on October 19 to meet with Vladimir Zelensky and Defense Minister Andrei Taran.

The topic is Ukrainian reforms in the field of defense and the military-industrial complex, as well as the situation in the Black Sea.

The Pentagon chief just discussed the same issue with the Georgian authorities.

The meaning of "reforms" is not only in training the armed forces of these anti-Russian-minded countries, but also in preparing for the implementation of NATO standards with the prospect of joining the alliance.

It is clear that we are not talking about tomorrow or even the day after tomorrow. Maybe this will never happen and NATO will not withstand the pressure of the latest circumstances. For example, competition with the AUKUS block. However, a responsible Russian government is obliged to prepare for any scenario. Ukraine's accession to NATO would be the worst-case scenario, as it “goes beyond the red lines of Russia's national interests,” warned Dmitry Peskov in the film “Vladimir Putin: Master of the Game”. This will force Moscow to take proactive measures to ensure security.

What steps can Russia take? The Kremlin, as always, is in no hurry to threaten. But Bogdan Bespalko, a member of the Council for Interethnic Relations under the President of the Russian Federation, does not stand on ceremony. Moscow, he believes, can recognize the self-proclaimed republics of Donbass and place military facilities on their territory. At least air defense systems. The same is probably true for Georgia. After all, it was Tbilisi that attacked South Ossetia in 2008. And the fact that Saakashvili, who is responsible for the blitzkrieg, is behind bars, does not remove questions regarding the intentions of the current authorities.

In general, the former Soviet republics and our ex-allies in Eastern Europe are most fiercely in favor of NATO's aggressive course. Poland, the Baltic countries ... Having replaced the “older brother” with a new, more “progressive” one (one BLM is worth it), they themselves did not seem to notice that they fell into a new, albeit sweet so far, addiction. “These political regimes are very afraid that they will not be able to catch hold of the wing of an American plane leaving the limits of its former geopolitical influence,” spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova scoffed at the Russophobes.

It is gratifying that, as always in recent years, there is a creative unity between the foreign policy line of the executive branch and the position of the legislators - the State Duma's international affairs committee. And now its head, Leonid Slutsky, stated that “the NATO mission turned out to be“ impossible ”. He blamed for this entirely on the leadership of the alliance. “Russia tolerated attacks against itself for a long time ... The collective West has made a lot of efforts in recent years to curtail contacts. As they say, what they fought for, ”the politician said.

The unity of the various branches of power, as well as of the entire country, of the popular majority, in relation to NATO's position is all the more important because by the end of the year its new strategy should be ready and adopted at the next summit of the alliance.

It is already known that the concept of partnership with Russia in this document will be replaced by the concept of containing our country from a position of strength.

So, anything is possible.

Including the situation when the suspension of the work of the Russian representative office at the military bloc will become indefinite.

As in the days of the USSR.

Someone in Brussels should consider this.

The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.