It's interesting. Russia does nothing more than sort of mumble in protest as we sign up nation after nation in their neighborhood into our military alliance. NATO is not a boy's club, you know, nor is it an economic organization. It is purely a military alliance, providing for commonality of weaponry and military practices. Russia expresses discontent but does not even make formal protest in the UN as, one after another, we sign up its former allies (satelliet nations) into our military alliance.
But then, when we reach the final ones and attempt to sign up the nation that is actually on their border, their equivalent of what Canada or Mexico would be to us, they say "Oh hell no," and we label them as agressors. They stop our military advance on them and so they are the agressors.
You did know, didn't you, that the "economic aid package" which Ukraine turned down from The European Union included requiring that Ukraine adopt NATO weapon standards and convert their military within a few years. Aside from what that would cost Ukraine, and the profit it would involve for Europe and the US, it was a military incursion into Ukraine; an attempt to make the Ukranian military part of NATO. A reasoning person might see why Russia would object to that.
Modern Russia has not strayed far from the recent Soviet past but it is foolish to adopt close military relations with the outlying former Soviet Republics. Any entangling military alliance with any of them could eventually lead to armed conflict with Russia.
ReplyDeleteAs morally wrong as some may believe, it is in the best interest of the West to concede that Russia is to have a free hand on her immediate border.
When encircling an enemy it is sometimes best to only go as far as that enemy can tolerate. The risks might outweigh the benefits. Russian leadership appears to at least tolerate some of the former Warsaw Pact members in NATO but that is about as far they will likely go.