Did NATO promise Russia never to expand to the east? | DW News

[@rogerwilco2]

This is a big-power view of the world. From a position in a small country, the need for alliances is clear. Even if NATO would no longer exist, there would be some alliance of most European countries that would replace it, maybe with a more militarized Germany or Poland, France or UK at its core.

[@lamarazmoe6438]

Which would be better than a country that is on the other side of the Atlantic controlling Europe and war mongering

[@vonbrownYT]

@@lamarazmoe6438 People are so quick to forget that the reason westernEurope can feed itself enough to think about these things is because of that country across the Atlantic. That country promised the USSR, not Russia

[@IoanaHaitchi]

Ucraine is not a small country, it is really big and important.

[@nomayor1]

If NATO truly was what it was claiming to be, firstly it would have been dissolved after the dissolution of the USSR. Secondly, it would have at least once proven some value in acting as it was founded to be, i.e. as an organization to protect its member countries. In short, as a *Defensive* organization. Rather, NATO has not even once defended any member country. Since it was created, NATO has been exclusively an Aggressor, bombing, invading and destroying other countries.

[@lamarazmoe6438]

@@nomayor1 NATO is a hegemonic imperialist power, which is why Columbia is a member even though it's in the southern hemisphere and mostly bordered by the Pacific Ocean

[@drevilatwork]

Interesting how conversations hold a lot of water but SIGNED agreements don't have any value like the Budapest Memorandum

[@sarlaz3407]

No agreement signed or unsigned means much to anyone involved. The sooner you learn that, the better.

[@troy66777]

Because it doesn’t fit the Kremlin narrative of course, but are we surprised? Freedom = Slavery to them lol

[@JoeyBlogs007]

@@sarlaz3407 WRONG !!!

[@JoeyBlogs007]

@@troy66777 CORRECT !!!

[@JoeyBlogs007]

CORRECT !!!

[@ceemichel]

Didn't Russia pledge to respect Ukraine's sovereignty and territory in 1994?

[@AndryFateev]

well nato expended before 1994)

[@Dumpsteret1]

People who mention the Budapest Memorandum forget there's a myriad of international treaties and Charters protecting a country's sovereignty, not only Budapest. The fact is since the U. S. GB began to interpret Article 2 and 59 of the U. N. Charter in the 1990's to permit Preemptive Defensive Humanitarian Military Interventions, state sovereignty is no longer guaranteed by law. If anyone feels threatened, by anyone anywhere, true or not, thanks to Pax Americana it's a jungle out there. I would also remind you Ukraine's nukes were never theirs to give up. Ukraine never had access to or control of the SOVIET arsenal, neither the infrastructure to maintain and operate it. When the Soviets left they took their nukes with them. So the Budapest argument you people like to pull out of the hat is just another hollow, knee JERK western talking point. In others words BS

[@IrtizaNadeem-jt8cn]

@@AndryFateev But there was no pact Russian signed on NATO.

[@Eu-Abreu]

​@@ntf5211 call it a coup how many times you want, but that same president of ukraine never respected the reason why he was elected in the first place... To look towards Europe. We all know it was a matter of time until Russia made Ukraine a puppet state like it does with others, specially Belarus. No small country can endure a major attack on it's Sovereignty without help from major power or an alliance. Whoever helped in coup, it truly helped Ukraines sovereignty, it was like the smooth stones on David's sling.

[@Just_a_wild_guess]

​@@Dumpsteret1 First part is matter of interpretation, though the US interventions occured, US borders never expanded due to them. US borders technically have not expanded in over 100 year's. As for nuclear weapons maintenance facilities yes, however Ukraine had scientists and engineers to make that possible. Ability to fire lmao, Ukraine could have very easily made any necessary changes to use and maintain their facilities. Ukraine played a leading role in Nuclear technology that started in the late 1920's. Putin made it very clear during the mention of Ukraine rearming due to failures of Russia to maintain the Buddapest Memorandum that Ukraine was very capable of doing so.

[@mso1ps4]

The fact that Finland joining NATO didn't get much of a reaction in Russia probably suggests it wasn't about NATO.

[@ZzaphodD]

Correct

[@SDDanil1123]

finland is less aggressive and more willing to negotiate unlike ukraine who will greet the american military ships and nuclear weapons and place them near russian border

[@mso1ps4]

@@SDDanil1123 Still ruins the narrative about big, bad NATO lmao

[@dmytroprokhorenko6538]

@@SDDanil1123 maybe Ukrainians would treat you better if you hadn’t occupied their lands, killed thousands of their people and stolen thousands of their children? Russian troops in Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine prove that the only aggressive neighbor is ruzzia

[@Blanka1100]

@@SDDanil1123 Nato is at Russia's borders for decades. Did Putin wake up yesterday? Nato is an excuse. Putin wants to annex Ukraine. And BTW Ukraine is not Russia's backyard anymore. It is independent state.

[@JohnDoe-kb9sj]

Remember East Germany, the wall, the many people that had lost their life trying to escape, when the Soviet Union had invaded Hungary for declaring it's independence? That's why more boarding countries with the Soviet Union had joined NATO

[@Fellowtellurian]

We remember. The bully will never win. The Union is stronger than the lone wolf.

[@yinli757]

Not if he lone wolf armed with enough nukes. He's winning the war before it started, and he won't back out before he gets what he wants. Ukraine is being sacrificed. No one can win a fight with a madman who got nothing much to lose. We're all in the darkest hours.

[@donnacollins1356]

Yes I remember watching it on TV was very big news

[@femmeNikita27]

Nope. Post Soviet countries joined NATO because they had Russian tanks on their streets before trying to "restore the peace and order". Former soviet block break away countries know what it is like when Russia " brings peace and order."

[@donnacollins1356]

@@yinli757 please don't say that Ukraine is going to win this illegal War that has been forced on them

[@marcinwilk860]

There is important thing missing about definition of "expansion to the east" in 1990 - not only Warsaw PAct still existed in 1990,but also there was 80 000 Russian troops in Poland alone,and ZRussia didnt want to withdraw it even while Warsaw PAct ceased to exist. Btw. we in central and eastern Europe knew it very well,that Russian imperialism will come back sooner or later. Just want to remind,that Ukraine demanded security guarantees from Nato in 1994,when it was forced to give up their nukes. Guess,why?

[@gailalbers1430]

OMG - thank you - that is so important to understand ! So wow: then they still gave the Status of protection in the Ukraine?. What exactly were the agreements ?

[@davidw8668]

Budapest agreement, Russia guaranteed Ukraine peace and sovereignity

[@waynegabler6570]

@@gailalbers1430 Russia is in the Ukraine because Kyiv had killed 13,000 civilians and NATO was doing nothing to stop it. End of story. When that issue is done (if Russia has to win the Ukraine that is what will happen) the rollback on the expansion solution will begin as that is a separate issue that Brussels is involved in rather than the US. Brussels and the EU World Banks fund NATO rather than they fund the US. It isn't like NATO doesn't back away from any treaty they sign, whenever they want, anyway.

[@Yu-vc3yg]

@@waynegabler6570 tell me, why are you tripping so hard? What 13k are you talking about, this is all Putin’s bs.

[@efisgpr]

@@waynegabler6570 Flagged for misinformation

[@seanomaille8157]

Correction: The map shows Ireland as part of NATO. Ireland is a neutral country like Finland and Sweden and Switzerland.

[@ibrahimabdul3138]

Switzerland is no longer neutral.

[@RyzenShanks]

Many people here are dumb. They can't understand "military" neutrality.

[@MamieCee]

@F A "One day this COULD be accurate?" That's not really what I expect (or what any of us should accept) from an established and respected news source. Honestly.

[@ibrahimabdul3138]

Zelensky feels like world boss.. he ask everyone to follow his order...

[@josecermeno7541]

Not anymore coming soon !

[@robbas_krk1510]

It started in Poland in February-June 1989 - not in East Germany. Also, in East Germany it started in 1989 (but in November), when the wall collapsed - not in 1990.

[@wessexdruid7598]

The wall didn't simply 'collapse'. It was pulled down, by those who lived there.

[@robbas_krk1510]

@@wessexdruid7598 Sure it didn't. That's a commonly used metaphor.

[@Blanka1100]

@@robbas_krk1510 Poland was first post communist to have free election. It was in June 1989 while The fall of Berlin Wall took place in November.

[@robbas_krk1510]

@@Blanka1100 That’s exactly what I’m saying.

[@marvin2678]

What started ?

[@julesfisher3551]

The bottom line is whether countries are able to determine for themselves their strategic, political and economic alliances. If not they are not independence countries, but puppet states.

[@WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq]

Ukraine itself was fully self sustaining. The system was very pretty, but it was better then what Putin had for it and they declared independence themselves

[@utkarshverma7]

true , thats why russia acted for its own self interest , to keep USA away . your statement can be said for russia to

[@mrparts]

, But no one is threatening Russia. FOR YEARS, the US and EU did everything to integrate Russia into the western economic system. Accession to the G7, admission in the WTO, and joint military exercises between NATO and Russia, Europe became totally dependent on Russian gas imports. What is really happening is that the Russian govt wants to maintain an obsolete centralized autocratic structure that runs the country like a mafia, serving elites in the govt and keeping the regions begging for handouts from Moscow, despite having massive oil and gas revenues. The russian govt sees the EU style of government with accountability and sharing of power as a severe threat to their corrupt business.

[@dickmojica6830]

Lithuania Estonia Poland, Latvia, Romania are part of nato but they never felt being puppet,, they are secured because there's organization they could rely when an evil want to terrorize them

[@michaelgl8516]

Are you saying that right now, Ukraine is in the process of showing NATO that they're able?

[@alanklm]

As a person, whove spent 1/2 of my life in Ukraine, 1/4 in Germany and 1/4 in Russia I'm very thankful to you for this video. We need more videos about facts to oppose the manipulations in the official media and unofficial "rumor" channels (on both sides).

[@antiChinazi]

Which official media

[@grapentine739]

@@antiChinazi the corporate ran state media like cnn msm and even fox. abc nbc reports the same cia talking points. There is a lot of evidence on it. Watch the latest videos from Jimmy Dore and George Galloway even if you disagree with them because you guys have opposing perceptions. They are honest and have good evidence to back it up

[@dmitryletov8138]

@@antiChinazi DW is funded by from the German budget.

[@avibhagan]

DW news is LYING by OMMISSION , as most lying news agencies do. What did they leave out ? (1) Putin was very friendly to NATO and after the dissolution of the USSR and Germany's entrance into NATO, Putin asked to join NATO , which would have been great for world peace and end global competition between NATO and it's historic enemies Russia and Germany. (2) NATO refused ! So DW forgot to tell you, that peace was an option and that Putin was the main sensible and rational person. DW forgot to tell you that the Conflict between NATO and Russia is as a consequence of NATO's denial of Russia to join NATO after the allowed Germany. Don't you think that this is a VERY IMPORTANT thing that should not be left out of this video ?

[@jannmutube]

---- > Ukraine and o ther former Soviet satellites were to remain neutral; that would mean no westward expansion by Russia as well. No eastward expansion was negated by Russia's invasions of Chechnya, Georgia, and Crimea. Not only has Putin put its military in Belarius, it had its Constitution modified to allow nuclear weapons.. So, Russia has nukes in Belarius.

[@1ACL]

Its not so much about "Eastern expansion" as it is about the People of Eastern Europe wanting to go West. For reasons...

[@MrMielten]

Exactly!

[@thomasau3204]

There's a difference between joining a EU and NATO...

[@Ursfrndlyneena]

so if Canada and Mexico chooses to join a chinese NATO, America will be cool right?

[@u.s.navy_pete4111]

@@Ursfrndlyneena But they don't want that. That's because the US does not threaten to invade them unlike Russia is doing in Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus and Kazakhstan.

[@ultracapitalistutopia3550]

After the dissolution of USSR, the "disputes" between Russia with Chechnya, Moldova and Georgia were the reasons which scared these countries to distance themselves from Russia. Beware of history revisionist/pootin-apologists attempting to rewrite history, they are many on the internet.

[@drevilatwork]

How about the BUDAPEST MEMORANDUM ? which was a WRITTEN and SIGNED deal in which RUSSIA, USA and UK SIGNED to guarantee Ukraine's safety and sovereignty in exchange for its huge nuclear arsenal

[@MihailBFC]

@@m.k.3145 😂😂😂

[@fungames24]

What about it? Do you mean anyone but russia is allowed to break an agreement? Neither the US nor UK is guaranteeing ukrain's safety now. The deal is worthless.

[@tw0million]

@@m.k.3145 what about Russian-Ukrainian Friendship Treaty - Russia broke it in 2014

[@zvzv3684]

@@tw0million Россия ничего не нарушала. В Крыму прошел референдум, где люди абсолютным большинством проголосовали за воссоединение с Россией. Международное право соблюдено, прецедент Косово. Кроме того, Крым это русская земля и народ Крыма никто не спрашивал, когда его подарил Украине Хрущев и даже тогда это было в рамках СССР. Крым вошёл в состав Украины в 1991 году на основании межгосударственного договора между Республикой Крым и Украиной, у Крыма был свой президент и конституция, а Украина выслала президента Крыма и отменила в одностороннем порядке конституцию Крыма, изменила ее под себя. Крымчане были преданы Ельциным в 1991 году, но все равно, находясь в украинской оккупации почти 23 года остались русскими. Украина с 1991 по 2014 год проводила тотальную украинизацию Крыма, заставляла крымчан отказаться от родного русского языка и от своей Родины России. Но Крым дождался исторической справедливости и в 2014 году вернулся домой. Учите историю!

[@defendfreedom1390]

USSR ceased to exist. NATO leaders have never signed any treaty that they would not admit new members. On the other hand Russia SIGNED a treaty that it guarantees borders and independence of of Ukraine.

[@crazylordbc3347]

The Kremlin should ask itself why all its neighbors are seeking NATO membership. The fundamental problem is that Russia does not respect its neighbors or their rights as sovereign states.

[@LubaB]

Oh you mean like the other numerous countries that have waged war on Russia over the centuries? Stop killing Russian men and trying to take all the Russian women and then trying to live off of their land rent free and you're not going to have to worry about "defending" yourself.

[@josephj6521]

Exactly Crazylord!

[@crazylordbc3347]

@@LubaB Education prevents stupidity!

[@IloveCamels335]

Says who? Your media that is brainwashing you? Oh yeah they are all joining NATO because they are so scared of "dictator Putin". Funny then that they all joined NATO long before Putin even became President. People are so braindead it´s not even funny anymore

[@Guplk]

@@IloveCamels335 sez you

[@dustincaldwell2049]

I can honestly see how Russia would not want NATO expanding closer to its border. Doesn’t give them the right to invade a sovereign country though.

[@rediettadesse2828]

Same thing happened in cuba -america with vise versa situation Just stop influencing , provoking , and live in peace

[@viperabyss]

​@@rediettadesse2828 ...except it's not. Russia can't invade US from Cuba. Russia can invade the rest of Europe.

[@RoninTF2011]

@@rediettadesse2828 Sorry, if russia was a better neighbor, maybe these nations would not have wanted to join NATO in the first place...but constantly implying that these nations should not be free, makes them highly suspicious of russia. Same goes for the russian view of history...while russia claims to have "liberated" Poland and the baltics...these nations wholeheartedly disagree...

[@pemzg]

@@rediettadesse2828 Then Russia should stop bullying her neighbours, stop interfering in their internal matters. Realise that USSR is over and she has no right over these states.

[@skytron22]

@@rediettadesse2828 while I am inclined to agree, NATO isn’t attempting to wage war with Russia. It’s not NATO’s fault former Warsaw Pact countries choose to join NATO. Given how Soviet Russia treated its neighbors, such as Hungary, it’s no surprise Eastern Europe massively distrusts Russia. That isn’t to say the US is entirely benevolent, but it’s more so an issue of choosing the more benevolent of two superpowers. Unfortunately for Russia, they’ve not done much to inspire trust in its former Soviet allies.

[@dennistofvesson6351]

After watching this video and looking at many of the comments, not all of them because 8000+ comments is a lot, I have come to my own conclusions. There may well have been some under the table promises and talks about that one should give Russia some promises regarding NATOS expansion in eastern Europe. But the fact is, in my opinion, that there are no real promises made, and absolutely not in any agreements. One can argue that NATO has been showing neglect in handling this question but the fact that Russia use this as an excuse to invade Ukraine is totaly insane. It's just as crasy as using the denazification of Ukraine as an excuse. So keep on arguing if there was or wasn't any promises but this is no excuse to start a war.

[@bradleymalcolm7025]

Well I mean none of these countries were invaded or couped to coerce them into joining nato. If so many communist dictatorships suddenly become democracies and through self determination decides to join nato, then Russia must be offering a less favourable deal, which they absolutely are. The Warsaw pact was never about ideology, it was about warm water ports and a big buffer zone against the west. Just like the Russian empire the soviet Union replaced, no country's culture, language or independence came above Russias need for more distance between its borders and its industrial heartland

[@theonehappyorc1235]

You speak like a brit.

[@wiryantirta]

the funny thing is ALL of those NATO applications are voluntary. if russia posed no threat to them, why do they run towards the west? NATO is a necessity, and Chechnya, Georgia, and now Ukraine proved exactly that necessity.

[@wiryantirta]

@@bradleymalcolm7025 self determinism is not a word russtards recognize. defense of peace and sovereignty is through superior firepower is the only language these orcs, time immemorial, understand.

[@darenzy]

@@wiryantirta Being sovereign next to a superpower is a no. You do remember what happened to Cuba when Fidel thought his country is sovereign, western troll, since we are calling names?

[@SympNerv]

A despot will use whatever excuse seems legitimate to make their argument seem sound. What can you do, a warmonger's gonna war. These are the EXACT same tactics as in Georgia, Putin just decided not to stop this time.

[@michaelgl8516]

But Georgia is so much smaller than Ukraine. I can understand Putin not wanting to let go of such a sizeable prize, not to mention the rich farmlands & minerals. It was literally the best part of Russia.

[@babblo1389]

James Baker did in FEB 1990, stenograms are a living proof. Not an inch eastwards. Besides: 🇺🇦🇺🇦 Ukraine's Independence declaration of Aug 1991 included non-aligned status and US did not recognize it's Independence until that declaration was put on nation-wide referendum in Dec 1991. (4 months!!! of waiting because oral promise before Moscow had to be approved by a majority of Ukraine's🇺🇦🇺🇦 population in the WRITTEN form). Be smart, Google it and don't let Media brainwash and fool you.🙄🙄

[@ericjsmoczynski4374]

Your post is a psychological projection. Ukraine and the US/NATO have been the hostile actors if not since 1990, absolutely since 2014.

[@michaelgl8516]

@@ericjsmoczynski4374 Troll!

[@ericjsmoczynski4374]

@@michaelgl8516 Another psychological projection. The troll is you. Come back when you know a single relevant fact about Russia, politics, or history.

[@jin1740]

Well, Russia signed security guarantees for Ukraine in exchange for Ukrainian nuclear disarmament after the collapse of the USSR. Obviously those "guarantees" werent kept were they?

[@Anonymous-ii5oo]

So, who is the first breaker?

[@88Vrus88]

After Ukrainian President literaly stated that the want to get the weapons back.

[@samsmith2635]

Those Guarantees are moot since Ukraine embraced NATO which is many inches to the east of Germany... Russia has a legitimate beef with NATO post Cold War.

[@underratedunity1528]

Exactly!

[@ChickenMcThiccken]

how many promises did russia keep?

[@steveinkent9843]

Ukraine gave up their nuclear missiles on agreement with Russia for non aggression. So Russia can't bleat about old agreements - that are fictitional anyway!

[@renemolina2645]

Russia agreed fornon aggresion...but ukraine did not respect the MINSK AGRREMENT and was killing russian speaking people in the donbass area for 8 years...that is why the agreement did not stand in place anymore.

[@Songer80]

@@renemolina2645 Hahaha... you fell for the Russian KGB lies. That's in their playbook. It's the same lie they used to invade Georgia. There are so many Russians in Ukraine because Russia killed of a quarter of the Ukrainian population and sent Russians to settle on the dead Ukrainian's land.

[@MrJakeyyy]

Supposedly all of the nuclear missiles that Ukraine gave up. Belonged to Russia before Ukraine left Russia. So Ukraine didn’t have access to the codes to use the Nukes. So it made sense for them to give them back.

[@paulbatts9585]

There was no written agreement on nato expansion. It was only talk

[@jonathanvillegas7570]

Those were Russian missiles Ukraine didn't have access to anyways. Just like Turkey can't wake up and nuke it's neighbors tomorrow because the US missiles are controlled by the US President. It was mostly a formality. Ukraine didn't have the launch codes so they either agree to return them or Russia sends in a military force to recuperate them.

[@piotr2304]

Simplistic view by Germans towards Eastern Europe and the sovereignty of other countries. This is a hit piece against democratic decisions of free people.

[@mojo1388]

I’m so sick and tired of countries dictating how certain other countries should act or not. If a free independent country wants to join NATO, let them join. The Baltic States rushed to join NATO and the EU because they knew that if they don’t, Russia will try to occupy them again. They restored independence in 1990 and filled the docs to join the alliances in 1994. After 10 years they got lucky and were accepted to both NATO and the EU.

[@beltashazzar5277]

If we apply this to the US of A as well, then I'll agree.

[@tahmids4082]

You wouldn't have said the same for Cuba if they wanted russian nukes in its land if you were there during the time of Cuban missile crisis, would you ?

[@lifeisgreat11]

But who is the NATO for? Do you think if US would by anymeans accept a rivalary Mexico with Russian messiles deployed?

[@spantik4696]

and who are you btw? president of us of a?

[@mojo1388]

@@lifeisgreat11 if Mexico applied to become a member it would have to follow certain steps to get in. It would take at least a decade.

[@ashcarrier6606]

The United Nations Charter asserts the right of countries to ally with other countries of their choice. And Russia SIGNED that. There are three treaties or documents Russia signed that asserts the right to form or join alliances. The first was the U.N. Charter. The most recent one being The NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997. If anyone has broken their word, it is Russia.

[@hillbillyhomestead1966]

No Ukraine broke the deal not Russia

[@jamesdoe5804]

There a minks agreements that guarantees special treatment for lunask and donesk but Ukraine broke that when they attack those regions.

[@zagreus8622]

Try convincing Latin American countries of that. Ever hear of the Monroe Doctrine?

[@renanfelipedossantos5913]

Putin is 100% to blame and I hope he pays it very soon.

[@jamesdoe5804]

@@zagreus8622 yeah what happened to Cuba last time when they join the USSR 😓

[@fromjapanworld]

Not expanding to the east when the USSR was a country is understandable, but when the USSR crumbled, there was no reason for free countries not to join if they wanted to.

[@krultheg3021]

Exactly. I think NATO can not expend anywhere, since its an organisation and not a country with borders. Can we blame NATO for the fact that countries in eastern Europe want to join NATO?

[@Arshahan]

@@krultheg3021 Eastern Europeans had 0 reason to join NATO. Russia DID NOT pose any threat to them. Why would they want to join? That's the question.

[@krultheg3021]

@@Arshahan What? Russia did not pose any threat? Do you know what happening to Ukraine now? And what happend to Crimea? And even without Russia as a threat. Why would there be no reason to join NATO? I see alot of reasons for a small country to join NATO.

[@hms493]

Just imagine arguments like this 🤦🏾‍♂️

[@jerrynaga5917]

NATO was not dissolved and that's the problem

[@cacwgm]

I very much doubt whether anyone in power at the time actually saw the breakup of the Soviet Union coming a year in advance. My memory of the fall of the Berlin Wall was that analysts, and political and military were taken completely by surprise - and were totally flabbergasted when the Soviet Union fell apart a year later, though it was apparent to many ordinary people that it was (in both cases) a matter of when, not whether these events happened. Certainly that was the feeling amongst my circle, and none of had special information. So, James Baker could not have promised to bar Eastern European countries from NATO. It would have been inconceivable to him that the issue would even arise in his lifetime. NATO leadership did not favour eastward expansion, most likely because they didn't believe that former Warsaw Pact countries feared Russia and actually wanted to be Western European - the Cold War in Europe was based on the idea that alliances and politics were static: 'everyone' knew that. To allow (for example) Poland to join would be to invite the cuckoo into the nest.

[@Hhajsjeieirhrbbr]

Look into it man. This guy Bruce P Jackson was a vice president for strategy at Lockheed Martin the year he left, he went on to the board for eastward expansion on NATO board. He was the main man behind getting nato east. Which comes with the condition that countries joining are to upgrade their fighter jets..

[@thankmelater1254]

You're the dude giving wedding vows while eyeing the bridesmaids.

[@UkraineNeeds]

The dude isNATO.

[@pogo1140]

@@Hhajsjeieirhrbbr look into it? Start with the Gorbachev who was the person with whom the Americans were negotiating with. You no what he said??? Nyet, no promises were made nor did he even ask

[@ferrariguy8278]

To understand Russia's lie about NATO expansion... in 2014 Mikhail Gorbachev gave an interview to "Russia Beyond" a Russian state-owned news agency RIA Novosti... in the interview he was asked why he had not sought a document to legally encode what Baker had said about not moving “one inch further east.”... Gorbachev explained that the Baker remark was being taken out of context and replied: “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all.” and later in the interview he clarified what the actual context was... “Making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR [German Democratic Republic] after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context.” ... There was NO promise NATO wouldn't expand to other nations, there was an agreement that NATO forces wouldn't move an inch into East Germany and build bases after Russia allowed Germany to unite.

[@ferrariguy8278]

@Manas Kumar If it's not obvious by now how important NATO is IDK what else would convince anyone. Besides NATO shifted into an economic and political improvment alliance which has done wonders for crumbling ex warsaw pact states. Remember, NATO isn't like the old Warsaw pact which truely did expand like a cancer through the use of tanks rolling into capitols. NATO doesn't "expand." It BUILDS. It builds through VOLUNTARY association. That makes it bigger for sure. The other thing your'e woefully missing is the massive ongoing (prior to now) draw down in troops under NATO command, and the (prior to current events) lack of deployment of miltary forces to the Eastern flanks. It was it's weakness that encouraged this, not it's strength. Russia isn't threatened by NATO. That's a pretext. Putin is threatened by the political systems that occur when a country is capable of being a NATO member. He's deathy affraid of that sytem, not NATO's expansion.

[@ferrariguy8278]

@Manas Kumar I think you dont' undestand the Cuban missile crisis either. Those weren't just Missiles. Those were NUCLEAR weapons in Cuba. Cuba and Russia have always been in an a miltary/political alliance. That's not the problem. Nor a problem w/ conventional arms going to Cuba. You know what was never contemplated (until now)? Nukes in eastern nato bases. Really much of any sigifigant miltary in the east... There was never any danger ot Russia from that. In fact, due to treaty, they know where every last US Nuke ICBM is located down to the serial number, and we know the same (or are supposed to) about theirs. This is about an old man who realizes his Tsaritst dreams will dissapear if he doesn't do something now. And due to internal pre-existing Russian dynamics, he's freaked out about his own power and legacy (which are now smashed).

[@extraordinarywolf320]

It's not a lie. The NWO wants Russia, that's why we have this war.

[@ferrariguy8278]

@@extraordinarywolf320 Q Anon wants you! Russia lies. It has always lied. Its in it's governmental historical DNA. It's not a byproduct of anything done to them by the west. And if you're not old enough to remember these things just re-look up the Kremlin approved STASI Operation Denver/Invektion. It's now being recycled iwth a Ukraine twist. The CCP picked up on two years ago it because it featured Ft Detrick being accused of developing AIDS and decided that made for a good story. Remember 1/2 of Russians (by survey) still believe the US never landed on the moon.. and that's due to Russian media lies.

[@irustv7674]

Gorbachev is USA agent who kill millions of russians.

[@humblepie1017]

As a 58-year-old man who pays close attention to Geo political events, I am here to tell you, that NATO, the United States, and Europe promised not to expand to any of the post satellite states of the Soviet union, including Poland. Not only is Poland in NATO now, but there are many other countries that used to be Soviet satellite. States that are now part of NATO. the west flat out lied. Russia has a long history of invasions against them. They have every right to be nervous about NATO moving right against their border. Especially when NATO has been at war for over 30 years now invading one country after another.

[@Blanka1100]

It is Russia which keeps invading its neighbours, not the opposite. Eastern Europe is not Russia's backyard anymore. Joining Nato is a free will of every state and who is Russia to decide about independent country's pact choices? You have no idea what Eastern Europeand have been through because of russian greed and imperialism over the centuries.

[@uan2498]

Exactly....look in history books.....go east was the Motto

[@Blanka1100]

@@uan2498 Russia had nothing to offer to Eastern Europeans exept for poverty, geocine, comminism, annexing. Nobody in right mnd wants to be allied with Russia. It has always been made by force. Russia must stop aying the victim card. If so many Eastern Europeans hate Russia it is for a reason.

[@derherredur4468]

Still they had written treaties that guaranteed Ukraine's independence and sovereignty. What war is NATO involved in? No the US is in fact not NATO, the european countries have opposed them on multiple occasions, especially under bush... Also russia was not kept out of the loop and the first nations that joined had Gorbatschovs ok to do so.

[@gileschance952]

correct. In 1990 there were 14 countries in NATO. Today in 2024 there are 32. Putin knows that Washington lies, all the time, and there is no point in agreeing anything with Washington because they cannot be trusted. So he's going to negptiate with the West at the point of a gun, which is the only way.

[@markrutlidge5427]

Putin needs to ask himself why so many ex Waswaw pact countries want to join NATO and EU.

[@michaelgl8516]

He' a narcissist. That would be impossible for him.

[@marczhu7473]

He asked for Russia adhesion too in 2000. He got rejected you can find the reason with Biden interview 97

[@DgurlSunshine]

@@michaelgl8516 DID AZOV TELL YA THAT? OR THE PINKOS?

[@DgurlSunshine]

@@michaelgl8516 ISRAEL NEEDS TO FUND ITS OWN HOLY WAR

[@blengi]

Putin needs to ask himself why he wanted NATO to expand eastward right into Russia 2000ish, Bill Clinton saying he had no objection. Putin can't have been very threatened back then about all the "not an inch to the east" stuff....

[@grietga]

Commitments, if any, were made towards the USSR which self-dissolved a few months later. So, is such commitment still valid? and if yes, towards whom? Indeed, it is parts of that very former USSR which did later request to join NATO: Baltic Countries, Ukraine and Georgia. In the case of Georgia, the request was even made by the by then President Shevardnadze, who was USSR's Minister of Foreign Affairs during the negotiations, and Baker's counterpart. Would Russia have any right to interfere with the sovereignty of other former USSR republics, and prevent them from choosing their own alliances? On what grounds?

[@Alblaka]

Ooof, the "Russia != USSR" point didn't even occur to me until recently. I mean, in reality it's a fairly simply link, but in legality, it is not, and in concept, Russia trying to imperialistically establish dominion using promises towards the USSR as a pretext is an antithesis to what the USSR *supposedly* was about.

[@no-name1084]

Correct..

[@babblo1389]

Russia took all the debt of USSR and repaid it alone. So, yes obligations to USSR=obligations to Russia. Or we better just promise them and break our promises??

[@defendfreedom1390]

USSR ceased to exist. NATO leaders have never signed any treaty that they would not admit new members. On the other hand Russia SIGNED a treaty that it guaranteed borders and independence of of Ukraine.

[@defendfreedom1390]

@Иван Иванович Soviet and Russian mass murders will never be forgotten.

[@lenz0101]

NATO is a free club and every nation has its own rights join or leave that club based on their National Interests and Contemporary Geopolitics of Europe. Vladimir Putin can't blame the West for its broken promises but he should ask himself why most Eastern European nations want to join NATO. Traumatic past of Soviet nasty actions in Hungary, the former Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Poland, Baltic States... and recently Russian aggressions in Georgia, now Ukraine,... have made the whole Europe scary of Putin's Russia. Even the peaceful Sweden and Finland are now being threatened. Putin's desire of restoring the Russian Empire is being broken down bitterly.

[@drnda2007]

yes, club, just join and drink tea and eat cookies

[@sustainablesolutions9152]

@@BocaoZ "free lunch" for Russians.

[@suportbghelp4938]

Sure Cuba was free to chose and now is enternally sanctioned.USA was clear to all, if u dot knee to me, you going to suffer.Its all about democracy.

[@IloveCamels335]

God people are so brainwashed. It´s hard to even read the comments on this channel. At least other news outlets have a more "awake" viewership. Putin has no desire to restore the ex Soviet Union. Use your heads people.

[@Blanka1100]

@@suportbghelp4938 USA did not try to annex Cuba and Ukraine had zero chance to join Nato. Putin invaded anyway. Because he wants Ukraine. He could invade non Nato Ukraine only.

[@animenation5324]

the thing is, every country that was in the USSR that has joined NATO, it's people were extremely afraid that Russia would come back to them what it has done to Chechnya, Georgia, Syria, and now Ukraine. Yes, the US is imperialistic and bombs many countries as a passtime, but in Europe, European countries literally will do anything to be under US protection umbrella, rather than suffer again under Russian rule (whose only way of ruling appears to be not attractive to them)

[@warbler1984]

Visit Russia before it visits you

[@claesmansson9070]

US protection or not,EU/GB have their own weapons both conventional/nuclear and yes US nuclear gifts too.Yes we work together,and have done so for a time,not on all I agree.Russia could have done the same with its neighbours,but it was so unfortunate to have a communist kgb agent as a president,elected or not,think mostly not,and he was convinced he had the right to kill civilians in their houses/apartments for no reason,if you think US is bad how about russ., now unloading thousands of their own returned dead bodies,not all could be scraped off the inside of their own hit tanks,now known as rolling coffins in Ukr.,from trains returning through Belarus?Was it really worth it?

[@CedarHunt]

@Nichòlas Nicholas Russia all but wiped Syria off the map. Entire cities were reduced to rubble under the Russian terror bombing campaign.

[@sayeedakhtar8647]

well Americans are more afraid of GERMANY rather than whole Europe as they don't want to relive the horrors of WW 2. In addition to that they have CHINA knocking at their door step as SUPERPOWER with RUSSIA being still relevant. If EU leaves NATO it surely would emerge as a superpower which UNCLE SAM might not be to happy with. it's not EU that needs AMERICA its the other way around and the recent action of RUSSIA has made the EU specially FRANCE and GERMANY to think about the effectiveness of NATO which has rattled UNCLE SAM.

[@animenation5324]

@Nichòlas Nicholas i mean destroy dude, chill out

[@nobodyknows3180]

Pointing at an agreement that was reached 30 years ago, ignores 30 years of events in Europe since. Times change, people change, countries and organizations decide to do something different. SUCK IT, RUSSIA.

[@ИринаЛукьяненко-ь3ъ]

SUCK , NWO

[@shahrahman4368]

Did - So far we know - the answer is - no. There is no written declaration so far we know.

[@stormelemental13]

Again, a conversation about the expansion of NATO that completely ignores the opinions of any of the countries involved. A german news company talking to Americans about why Estonia joined NATO and who's interests that served. Here's a novel idea, how about you talk to Estonians?

[@user-zj1uf8hs6t]

Estonians have no claim to independence from the USSR nor the other Baltic states. It is clear the Western would cherry picks who gets independence status.

[@angryanglocanadian7581]

Typical American answer: If it favors me, democracy! if not, the regime must be toppled hahahaha

[@HegelsOwl]

...wo. Unintelligible gibberish, buddy. Did NATO pledge not to go East, or did it not?

[@wli2718]

the opinion of those countries didn't matter. when Euromaidan happened, the USA already determined that the Ukranian president should be ousted and even named the next president to office. all of this was determined before the Ukranian electorate hit the ballot box. things can be arranged. the USA was also aware that the EU was against this. the US official's comment was "f&*% the EU".

[@faithnfire4769]

Because the Estonians voted on the matter. Ask an Estonian then; their opinions matter but I have a feeling it will be NATO favored these days.. historical polling suggests that. This is a German news channel, no surprise its them interviewing people. ?

[@SeeLasSee]

If this was important to Russia they should have requested a formal declaration. The soviets knew perfectly well to get things in writing. In doing so you get people to commit in their own kind. I think Putin started to care about NATO more after Libya.

[@pietrojenkins6901]

Putin has been looking for war at any cost and for the slightest reasons.

[@tonyone001]

@@pietrojenkins6901 agree, he just want more land rich of natural ressource , from what i understand, Nato will never attack any country first anyway , is just soo sad see this kind of war in 2022 :( , peace, prosperity and hella travel arround the world that is what people want :)

[@Sagar10.]

@@tonyone001 Surely you lack history knowledge. "NATO will not attack any country first anyway" 😂 are you kidding me

[@jamesreagan9063]

Correct! As He had said as much! "Mad Dog of the Middle East" had a lot of credibility at its time! (80's) God Bless the Victims over Lockerbie and below, though it must be said, there is significant contradiction to those that would look for it! Ie: Bringing water to those that thirsted for it, trying to introduce a sound form of currency! The utter depravity of the way the so called "Mad Dog" met his end. That he may have, in fact, took the legacy of Abe Lincoln to inspire some of his methods! This, while not, taking lightly, the Victims but knowing of reports of change to the flight manifest on the tarmac moments before takeoff! (1988) Be wary repliers of what we are told! As the great communicator used to say; "expect and inspect!" In so many words! Children run our 🌎! Truth be with You! Paused at the 53 $ec mark in podcast to make observations to that point!!

[@Danielseven-ir2mq]

Yes, Russia should have demanded that it be "Legally encoded" maybe gorbachev gets some blame.

[@PeetHobby]

NATO didn't moved to the east, the east moved to NATO. :D And was there ever really a document signed about that "NATO promises"? I remember that NATO invited Putin to NATO and Russians was by NATO briefings, they where partners. Edit: Soviet doesn't exist anymore, it's 2022 not 1980 anymore.

[@88Vrus88]

Your honor i didnt drive over the podestrian, the podestrian moved under my car.

[@lip9149]

NATO never moves anyway. NATO should have rejected eastern membership requests.

[@bigj1905]

It’s important to note that the U.S did not force any of these countries to join NATO, they did so because they feared for their military future when they are next to a larger and more powerful state that has a history of aggression. I think, more than anything, it was naive of Russian politicians to assume that former Warsaw Pact countries would not pursue relationships with the west, especially counties like Romania, Hungry, and Poland.

[@NazriB]

Lies again? SAF SPF Naughty America

[@Vsack9yolo09]

@@NazriB usa persuade and bribe this country

[@arreydharma5784]

Russia also didnt force Cuba. Look at the US panic, attack, and sanctions on Cuba for 60+ years. It is important to learn history and look in the mirror once in aa while

[@bigj1905]

@@arreydharma5784 Yeah, but the United States never invaded Cuba, even after the missiles left. It’s also important to note that the Russians use similar tactics in surrounding countries, but they are far more aggressive than the U.S. in the late 20th and 21st century. And as I tell everyone who points this out, just because the United States intervenes in some countries, doesn’t give you the right to invade a European country, displace millions, kill hundreds of thousands, and commit war crimes.

[@arreydharma5784]

@@bigj1905 read Bay of Pigs. Thats how "holy" US is. And yeah, killing millions of people around and stealing resources using illegal excuses are not better than occupying lol. Its such a cute excuse to feel as if west are not doing crimes 😂

[@jamesthomas1628]

Wait a minute. Since those statements "not an inch" were made, Russia has spent 100 billion plus rearming which is the reason behind those countries, Poland, etc. wanting to join NATO for defensive protection for a REARMED Russia client states joining in Russia's aggression. This thought should have been included in the original post.

[@tgreaux5027]

Yeah pretty sure now that the world is seeing this "powerful army" in action its pretty obvious they didn't spend that money on rearming....they stole that money. Thats why Putin is worth 100 billion dollars and owns a literal PALACE while their military trucks have tires that fall off the rim after an hour of driving lol.

[@nalalin8835]

Russia should not have the means to protect itself?

[@nsevv]

@@nalalin8835 From what exactly? Russia has only been invading others. Other countries should have the means to protect themselves from Russia

[@kirbyone]

Which happened first, Russia spends 100 billion rearming or Poland etc joins NATO? Besides which, joining NATO for defensive protection implies they're happy to not spend on their own defense, would rather somebody else fight to defend them hmm?

[@kirbyone]

Oh yeah, and while we're at it I guess if we should be worried about how much someone spends on their military then we should be like ten times more worried about America. Since we're speaking of aggressive countries that invade other sovereign nations

[@bionicbob1285]

Gorbachev admitted NATO never promised anything. Straight from Russia's mouth. If you believe otherwise your ignorant.

[@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721]

It's in the US official documents.

[@bionicbob1285]

​@@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721ya added by the U. S. Gorbachev wrote a book and talked about it. Maybe you should read it.

[@bionicbob1285]

​@@sixmillionaccountssilenced6721the U.S. may or may not have promised after Gorbachev but certainly not to Gorbachev's. I believe he was asked that question during an interview which may still be on youtube

[@islywynn7678]

Well even if there were verbal assurances those were given to a state that no longer exists: i.e. the USSR.

[@fungames24]

There's neither verbal nor written assurance that russia can't invade you. Does that means if they invade, it's all fine?

[@MarcosElMalo2]

@@fungames24 If you can’t see the categorical mistake you just made . . . It’s very telling that you don’t know the difference between aggression and self-defense.

[@jftauhid6311]

what's the point of existence of NATO then! what purpose does the article 5 stands for now! Crimea is a Russian state now. Imagine Ukraine joins NATO and wants the Crimea back and performs a military act and Russia resists. By article 5 it will be a War against NATO and USA vs Russia. And putting missiles 600 kilometers from Russia that missiles can hit Russia within 3 minutes. what's the purpose of development of modern weapons ! Talk about democracy and then also don't want to understand the geo politics. Imagine China one day make alliance with Canada and Mexico and out their missiles near US borders! Take Cuba for instance. What happened ! We talk about democracy and also want the world to ruled by One country!

[@tiagojose7498]

@@jftauhid6311 You don’t know if they would put missile in Ukraine. Don’t use hypotheticals and suppositions to try and register a solid rethoric.. it won’t, and doesn’t, hold water. You can’t make judgement values on things that haven’t happened. When countries use that system we get the current war

[@jftauhid6311]

@@tiagojose7498 You are telling me that A nuclear powered county like Russia will wait for the US and NATO to make it's move and then response ! We already know how the history has played out after the Fall of Berlin wall and the NATO expansion promise. Do your research and you will be enlightened with infos, how many bases US already has all over the World, specially in NATO Countries. Ukraine is a great strategic interest for Russia not for US. why do you think countries build defense system and invest in military if everyone is so Naive. It's just sad that after all this time and so many history lesson that's right before us , still people have to suffer because of Politics.

[@ms-mn5mz]

Ex Warszaw pact countries joined to the NATO because , they saw how russians acted towards Chechnya and Dagestan. They simply bombed them to the ground. Grozny almost stopped existing. If you see what your expartner have done to other countries, you want to join to the opposite. Thats why Slovakia , Poland, Czech and ofcouirse Baltic states joined to the NATO. To be in safe zone.

[@Blanka1100]

Those countries joined Nato not becaue of Chechenya war. They applied much earlier. They did it because of their own, sometimes 300 years old experience with russian imperialism. It was not matter of past 40 years. It was much deeper. They knew Russia would never change for better and they were right.

[@ms-mn5mz]

@@Blanka1100 agree

[@tasospanagiotou7823]

@@Blanka1100 At least they could have given some time to Russia to show If they have improved after the Soviet empire collapsed. By expanding NATO right after the soviet collapse the US probably wanted to exploit the russian weakness in the 1990s in order to assert and force their dominance worldwide.

[@Blanka1100]

@@tasospanagiotou7823 You keep spreading the same bs over and over again. West has been treating Russia like a special need baby for way too long and it did not pay off. We are done. Russia must stop blaming others for its own crimes, failures, mistakes and weakness and look n the mirror. We owe Russia nothing. And Russia's neighbours did the best thing possible by joining Nato because their security concerns are real and do matter while russian concerns are only Putin's paranoia. Russia is not their master anymore. Deal with it.

[@dimaua1830]

Putin: NATO bad, Western Europe bad... Also Putin: attacks Ukraine

[@utkarshverma7]

NATO in 2002: osama bin laden is our enemy who is in afghanistan ..................... also NATO 2003 : attacks iran for oil

[@dimaua1830]

Not sure what point are trying to mske. The point Im trying to make is if there are issues between two parties they should be decided between them, and not by attacking a “friendly” (by Russia's own words) nation. So Afhanistan and Ukraine are similar in this sense. And I am aware this behaviour happen elsewhere, not just with Rusdi/Ukraine.

[@Disagovsky]

NATO: Russia is bad and is a war criminal!! Also NATO: Irrisponsibly bombs Serbia Also NATO: Destroys Afghanistan, destroys Iraq, destroys Syria.

[@dimaua1830]

Read the comment above.

[@bilgyno1]

1. NATO 'assurances' were made to USSR + Warsaw Pact, not Russia. The new member states were part of either WP or even USSR, so clearly they didn't feel bound to any 'deal'. USSR ≠ Russia. 2. What about Russia's own role? Chechnya, Georgia, Moldova, all substantiated existing concerns in former WP/USSR countries, and they sought security in NATO.

[@proselytizingorthodoxpente8304]

Also, don't forget that Putin himself talked to Clinton about the possibility of Russia joining NATO in the early 2000s. He clearly didn't feel bound by any 'promise'.

[@RetroBerner]

Ask native Americans about the USA and "promises"

[@kuiama23]

I just said that. Sorry. Didn't see yours. But. Guess it's like . When my grandma died. The funeral home that bought the other one when the guy retired. They honored THAT agreement. So. Putin may indeed be a bad guy. But so is. NATO . And they pushed him in a corner they KNEW he would all but HAVE to act upon. How he is doing . Unfortunately predictable. But they did this KNOWING the outcome. And have caused a FALSE FLAG. that THEY INTENDED to occur. And just wait for what they have planned next. I've read the end of the book.

[@HohenEU]

At that time literally every country was killing other people. so what? We are in 2022 rn

[@kuiama23]

@@HohenEU oh. NATO planned this. Putin isn't a good guy. But then again. Always best for one u trust to stan u in the back. Just ask Caesar. Lmbo

[@HohenEU]

@clemathieu JT where are u from?

[@HohenEU]

@@kuiama23 that nato planned this doesnt make sense or is putin secretly working for nato? Xd. In my opinion putins puppets in europe made europe dependend on russian oil and gas and he is afraid that other countries which left russia deliever oil and gas to europe and putin cant loose his only way of income. I also believe that putin is afraid of democracy in ukraine, since if people in ukraine would have it better than in russia then russians would want to get rid of putins dictatorship

[@c.m.4078]

It is not NATO who is expanding East, it's the countries from East Europe who have been attacked by Russia who want protection from NATO. NATO can't force anyone to join like Russia did with the tanks after the WW2. Remember anti USSR revolutions in Czechoslovakia, Hungary how they wanted Russian boots out of their countries and then were invaded by Russian tanks

[@thorthewolf8801]

Doesnt matter. Russia does NOT get to dictate what other countries do. Russia does not get to dictate what alliances other countries join WILLINGLY. Eastern Europe is not the vassal state of Russia. We, in Eastern Europe are glad we are in the EU and NATO. The only reason they had any say is because of WW2, but that occupation was in itself unlawful.

[@dreamer27-h8k]

The USA literally dictates what other countries should do lol....

[@McStrokeAvision]

Another zombie talking nonsense. You people are apes on display at the zoo.

[@thorthewolf8801]

@@dreamer27-h8k Good thing I did not mention the usa at any point in my comment then. You people always manage to excuse stuff. Just because america had slaves doesnt mean that current slave owners are justified in having slaves.

[@thorthewolf8801]

@@BocaoZ Who is having double standards? You are punching a strawman.

[@epoxy1710]

Hehe set's see what will happen if Russia install there nukes in Mexico.

[@vytautasnaujokas9269]

By the view that RF can rely on whatever was promised to Soviet Union - Russian Federation should also be held accountable for all the crimes committed by the Soviet Union

[@r_Ggggg]

Now apply the same logic to all governments around the world.

[@esense9602]

They also paid the debt of USSR.

[@mikekelly5869]

@@esense9602 They defaulted on most of it. They took on around $70 to $100bn in debt in exchange for unincumbered ownership of the assets of the USSR, a good deal at the time. Only around $20bn of that debt was paid off.

[@milutintesla4804]

And who will be responsible for NATO crimes. Who will be responsible for killing the inhabitants of America who were the owners of the country before the arrival of the Europeans ??? Who will be responsible for the millions of slaves brought from Africa ??? Who will be responsible for the crimes of the Inquisition ??? Who will be responsible for the crimes in the second war ??? Who will be held accountable for crimes in Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea, China, India, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen and many others. As far as I know, the heirs of these countries still exist today. You are a rude hypocrite.

[@AntPet999]

What about us crimes? And wars. Find in wiki the list of countries it invaded in recent decades. No sanctions, no media bullying

[@horatiokim7141]

I hope things get better, feel so sad for the lives of the civilians out there.. 🥺

[@Greendii]

we all feel bad for them. it's not an easy time.. very saddening

[@Danielseven-ir2mq]

Difficult to stand by and watch all this with a shrug of indifference. But the world has seen many atrocities before and nothing has changed. Rwanda genocide. The Holocaust. Etc etc etc etc. Indifference indifference.

[@babblo1389]

James Baker did in FEB 1990, stenograms are a living proof. Not an inch eastwards. Besides: 🇺🇦🇺🇦 Ukraine's Independence declaration of Aug 1991 included non-aligned status and US did not recognize it's Independence until that declaration was put on nation-wide referendum in Dec 1991. (4 months!!! of waiting because oral promise before Moscow had to be approved by a majority of Ukraine's🇺🇦🇺🇦 population in the WRITTEN form). Be smart, Google it and don't let Media brainwash and fool you.🙄🙄

[@owenhoong88]

They had a dumb president

[@Danielseven-ir2mq]

@@ge_ming_wu_zui agree. This has the potential to mushroom to something much bigger. Time will tell.

[@ekesandras1481]

NATO promised not the station troops in East Germany, if the Soviet Union agreed to the reunification of Germany. And to this day NATO never stationed troops in East Germany. There is no NATO base in the five new federal states. Poland, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria are a different story. They chose themselves which alliance to join and nobody had promised anything concerning those countries.

[@ekesandras1481]

@72badry the US Airforce has no base in East Germany. Of course there are German barracks there.

[@randizimo]

Mr. Shifrinson failed to mention that Mikhail Gorbachev first proposed Russia joining NATO in 1990.....And Russia is East of NATO.....(He must have missed that class...lol...)

[@jirachi-wishmaker9242]

Even Vlad tried to join in his early career

[@tszirmay]

And of course what is never mentioned is that Ukraine asked to be a member of NATO and not the other way around. Poland and Hungary asked for membership hours after getting rid of the Warsaw Pact troops that went back to Russia in 1991. And they waited patiently for it until 1999 . Proof in Ukraine's case: Both France and Germany vetoed (I repeat VETOED) their candidacy on more than one occasion. One surely can't blame the Yanks for that? Some are playing politics again, claiming to be historians.....

[@aleong.9566]

"They underestimated how much Russia hated NATO???" What a quote by this American dude - Gorbatschow, Yeltsin and Putin said that during all the 30 years. And nobody listened because the US always thought that they are Gods. Well and now we are where we are. Thanks America

[@alanklm]

why "thought"? they still think. This conflict is beneficial for US. US does everything to prolong this conflict as much as possible to weaken Russia.

[@rexsceleratorum1632]

@@alanklm Putin has proven that he is an old fashioned imperialist by annexing his neighboring sovereign states. Weakening Russia is the only option left when Russia has become an expansionist threat to the world.

[@alanklm]

@@rexsceleratorum1632 you can think whatever you want, but I live in this reality. My state has not been annexed, people has joined Russia willingly to avoid the fate of Donbas (see Mariupol). Russia doesn't care much about its citizens, but Ukraine straight dehumanizes them, kills them and destroys the buildings they live it. And don't tell me this is Russias deeds in Mariupol, Ukraine has been doing it publicly for 8 years straight with approval of the west, it's just for some reason those 8 years are ignored now and somehow it's Russia destroys Donbas cities now, not Azov.

[@crystal2484]

Putin never keeps his promise to Ukraine too. So he is going to Hokkaido next since that was "verbally" communicated in WW2. This emo man lives in the past.

[@ursodermatt8809]

yes, my grandfather promised me russia west of the urals.

[@tw0million]

Russia also broke the Russian-Ukrainian Friendship Treaty when they attacked in 2014

[@Owen_loves_Butters]

Imo it should've been stressed a little more that NATO did not say "let's go east". Countries like Poland and Czechia said "Can we join NATO?" It's a very important distinction.

[@vasilimici1032]

Oh okay that’s why they’re killing innocent women and children. Phew I thought they were evil for a second…

[@tw0million]

​@@myviews9369are you talking about Russia?

[@truthboom]

@@myviews9369 it's 2022, spam nukes and the result will be the same, the distance doesn't matter lol

[@slabbygabby]

🤣🤣🤣

[@slabbygabby]

@@tw0million Duh yes evil Russia

[@luishernandezblonde]

We, Poles, wanted to join, and we did it. Finland has not joined officially, but it is already within NATO battle force because it understood Russia. Actually everyone wants NATO to admit them because of Russia. No need Putin to lecture his criminal education.

[@zvzv3684]

В 1933 году Польша стала первым государством, которое сразу же после прихода нацистов к власти в Германии установило с ними дружеские отношения. После выхода Германии 14 октября 1933 года из Лиги Наций польская дипломатия добровольно взяла на себя защиту ее интересов в этой организации. 26 января 1934 года Польша первой в Европе подписала с нацистской Германией Декларацию или Пакт о ненападении сроком на 10 лет. В секретной части Декларации была договоренность о взаимной военной помощи и разделе сфер влияния. В 1935 году Франция и СССР заключили военное соглашение о защите Чехословакии от немецкой агрессии. Это был реальный шанс предотвратить раздел Чехословакии в 1938 году и остановить Гитлера. Но этому воспрепятствовала Польша. Она заявила, что немедленно начнет военные действия против СССР, если тот попытается направить войска через польскую территорию для оказания помощи Чехословакии. Давайте вспомним высказывание Германа Геринга, сделанное в беседе с польским маршалом Эдвардом Рыдз-Смиглы: «Польша - наш духовный союзник. У нас прекрасно складываются отношения, и мы будем с вами до конца». Одной из наиболее преступных страниц в истории межвоенной Польши является ее участие в разделе Чехословацкой Республики в 1938 году. Привычная для поляков русофобия и цинизм уже никого не удивляют.

[@selcukcilek555]

You may assume that people are ready to listen to your Bs. But they aren't. There was a referendum in Poland to join EU or not. When was a referendum to join Nato? Which is commented by you " we Poles wanted to join, we did." With that OOMA statement I don't think you are mature enough to have an opinion about Finland or further beyond than your laptop.

[@luishernandezblonde]

@@selcukcilek555 Why did a Turk tell what my Poland has to choose? Don’t you ever wonder the time Russia almost invaded Turkey in WWI and Cold War? Poland had suffered from oppression by Russia and we have no reason to look at Moscow for help.

[@selcukcilek555]

@@luishernandezblonde Your first question actually exposes your limited mind. A Polish guy can have an opinion about Finland and Russia but is wondering if someone from a different country does the same with his country. You are lacking totaly the intellectual basics to discuss anything further.

[@luishernandezblonde]

@@zvzv3684 Прежде чем лаять про Польшу, Россия была первой страной, принявшей нацистских солдат в Европе. Германия получила дешевый доступ к российским ресурсам в обмен на очередные разделы Польши и Европы. Гитлер восхищался Сталиным и стремился подражать русскому диктатору. Не делай вид, будто не знаешь, Русские.

[@joshuaoha]

It ignores the rights of sovereign nations to say "nato expansion" or "US expansion." These countries have agency, and it's not up to the US or Russia to decide who can or can't join NATO.

[@sagittariusann1220]

Don't forget it, The US is the boss of NATO

[@Cr0uch1ng71g3r]

You think Russia, African nations and the rest of the world can join if they wish? NATO alone dictates where they want to expand.

[@thorthewolf8801]

@@Cr0uch1ng71g3r its a mutual thing, like any club. You may want to join a club but if you are not sympathetic you will not be let in. Similarly, the club might want you to join but you can decide not to, you are a free thinking adult, you can do however you please.

[@ericjsmoczynski4374]

Yes, in hard actual fact, it is up to the US to decide who joins NATO.

[@hcharton5722]

West Germany was part of NATO from the very beginning of NATO.

[@davidwoods7408]

The former nations of the Warsaw Pact wanted as many assurances as they could get that Russia would never infringe on or invade their country's again. They weren't forced to join. I believe it was the opposite. They were beating down NATO's doors wanting to join. Putin might take that to heart!

[@JohnSmith-rj2oz]

That doesn't matter if they wanted to join or not. There was a preexisting pledge. The US or NATO should have kept their pledge not to expand even an inch to the East. NATO could have very clearly said no we cannot expand. When the US or NATO break international law or precedent its fine. But when Russia does, its a heinous crime and must be taken to the Hague? Absolute hypocrisy and rubbish.

[@CombuskenKid]

@@JohnSmith-rj2oz A verbal pledge only and a pledge to a country that doesn't exist anymore. Any assurances to the USSR don't apply to the Russian Federation, the same way any assurances to the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth wouldn't apply to Poland, Lithuania or Ukraine

[@lip9149]

And a commitment-respecting NATO would have kept its doors tightly shut to these eastern European nations. The NATO would never have “forced” or even invited these nations to join anyway because that’s not a thing the NATO does! Normally, it’s other nations who have to apply for membership in order to join. Obviously, the commitment the NATO made was to reject membership requests from eastern states, not to “stop reaching out to eastern states” which is not a thing! And it’s not like these Eastern European countries forced themselves into the NATO either; the NATO had to choose to let them in and disrespect its assurances to Moscow. How absurd to say that the NATO states lived up to their assurances just because they didn’t “force” anyone to join! Is it really impossible to defend the NATO’s actions without resorting to this twisted kind of reasoning?

[@simonh6371]

I think the US offered them money, let's be realistic.

[@KRB1991]

Remember Stalin applied to join NATO and was rejected.

[@francalc8188]

Russia complains that Pact of Warsaw ended and not NATO. Pact of Warsaw countries where practically occupied countries by USSR. When USSR collapsed they never wanted have any relations with the occupiers and as a protection turn into NATO. So, NATO did not expanded, where the Eastern Europe countries who were looking for protection. And actual situation proved that. What would be for Poland now not to be part of NATO? So, those countries did not trust Russians and they were right.

[@simonh6371]

Instead those former WP countries and ex-Sov Republics i.e. Baltic 3 plus Ukraine (dunno about Belarus) should have formed a third alliance as a buffer between NATO and Russia. They would have been strong enough to assure mutual protection and knowing how the populations of Germany, France, Italy etc. resent US influence and are pretty pacifist in outlook it's probable they would have left NATO to join such an alliance. Can't say the same about the UK but the continental NATO countries would have joined and who knows maybe even neutral countries, at least Finland and Austria. Problem solved, peace in Europe. But of course the US didn't want to lose hegemony in Europe so now we have to go thru this shitshow. Grew up in the Cold War with the threat of nuclear annihilation hanging over us and it wasn't nice, then I was in the British Army in Germany 1989-93. I'm very pissed off and feel betrayed.

[@francalc8188]

Rusia como heredero de la URSS debe hacerse un serio planteamiento así mismo. Porqué la URSS se disolvió? Si lo tuvieron todo a lo que quisieran regresar, porqué se les fué de su poder? Y ahora quieren regresar a ese poder por la fuerza? Con las maniobras que Rusia está haciendo con respecto a Ucrania está jugándose el todo por el todo sin ningún planteamiento lógico a una victoria. Así ganase militarmente a Ucrania, después qué? Seguir invadiendo “países amenaza” uno por uno? Ya a estas alturas después de 1 año de guerra Rusia se ha posesionado contra toda Europa y Occidente. Su derrota significaría el mayor desastre político militar en toda su historia y Putin sigue soñando que todo va a cambiar en su favor.

[@cmolodiets]

pact of warsaw colapsed but Putin created a Collective Security Treaty Organisation in 2002 with Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan etc. Unlike the Pact of Warsaw, countries willingly belong to it. Armenia saw a way to defend against azerbaidjan with the help of Russia. The result is questionable but the pact does allow Russia to have military bases in those countries. The bases in Belarus proved useful during the special operation in Ukraine.

[@dustin1352]

When USSR deployed nuclear weapons in Cuba, the world came close to a nuclear annihilation. And now NATO has been Eastward expanding for a long time and soon Ukraine will be in NATO. Expect what Russian retaliation exactly like what the Americans did back then in 1962.

[@ursodermatt8809]

what, they are going to sanction ukraine?

[@faithnfire4769]

Latvia is as close to Moscow as most of Ukraine, and the Baltic sea is as close as either. Cuba mattered because of Nukes, when did NATO last threaten with Nuclear force? Russia just did again, that is modern news not history

[@tszirmay]

Not the same at all, there are no nuclear missiles in NATO nations that border Russia. The closest would be in Turkey actually......May I also remind you the US did not INVADE Cuba ......

[@saarza9991]

@@budiprasetyo3728 yeah killing innocent citizens

[@coraltown1]

you mean a naval blockade of Ukraine then

[@pontiuspilatus7900]

NATO did in my opinion not want to expand. Instead the countries which joined NATO caused NATO's expansion. I might be naive, but hasn't any country the right to join organisations? Why weren't the Budapest papers mentioned in this video? In this paper the Ukraine's borders where guarantied not only by the US, Britain, and France, but also by Russia. The Ukraine surrendered her nuclear weapons to Russia, in return for that guaranty. I think that Russia (i.e. Putin) bent the rules,

[@tasospanagiotou7823]

How do you know they really wanted to join without referendums on the matter of NATO? there was only one referendum in 1998 in Hungary. Why didnt they conduct referendums back then in all of eastern europe?

[@WhenBoredomStrikesChannel]

The question is, if they did not want to expand then why accept more?

[@alanmcgowan3457]

The Republic of Ireland is NOT in NATO and never was. Please correct the map. We do not want to be associated with NATO's war crimes. From Ireland, Slava Ukraine

[@warbler1984]

We don't want to be in NATO that's true. But why didn't we give our 100 javelins. If we became neutral to avoid imperialistic wars then why do we not send lethal defensive aid?

[@resevoirdog]

You and Russia are cute together. Get a room you two!

[@resevoirdog]

@@warbler1984 well said

[@artemvaka]

@@warbler1984 fun

[@patrykkowski3787]

theoretically, in 1939, when the Soviet union attacked Poland, they broke the non-aggression pact signed in 1932, which was to last until 1945. what about that?

[@julianbransky7168]

@@davidcrandall4958 Well, if I had to guess his point was that Russians cannot be trusted either. And he is completely right.

[@davidcrandall4958]

Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery,inside a conundrum but there is A key and that is their own national self Interests" Winston Churchill" just guessing Julian

[@davidcrandall4958]

Julian. Tell us about the Non Agression pact Germany broke with Russia? Throw in Operation Barbarossa while your at it?

[@patrykkowski3787]

the pact I wrote about is the Polish-Soviet Union. and the point is that politicians lie, no matter if they are Russian or of any other nationality, although the Russian ones are more famous for it ("if you want to know what Russia is planning, hear what they accused for their enemies") . As for the expansion of the nato, I believe Putin is soaping our eyes. he attacked Ukraine for another reason. back to the pact ... from what I see, the pacts are valid until they are profitable

[@KingOscar_1844]

Post-Cold War NATO members had every right to join given their history with Russia. Their very identity was at stake. So don’t take away their agency regarding joining NATO-no one twisted their arms, unlike the Warsaw Pact. This antipathy is even more justified by Russian aggression against Georgia and Ukraine. If anything, Putin gave NATO exactly what it needed: a reason to exist.

[@ttuliorancao]

if the goal was to guarantee the Eastern European countries' sovereignty it would be a way smarter move to have a military alliance of all of those countries outside of NATO. Poland, Ukraine, Finland, Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and so on. It would be a strong enough alliance to make Russia not attack any of them but still without the US, which would make the Russians fell less threatened. It just never happened because NATO expansion fits better then US' goal of complete control over Europe by making them all dependent on them.

[@KingOscar_1844]

@@ttuliorancao the only reason Russia won’t invade NATO members is the US is the backbone of the institution. Outside that structure, an anti-Russian alliance is exactly what Russia would want-pick each one off and dare the rest to fight it.

[@ttuliorancao]

@@KingOscar_1844 that's totally bulshit. Russia wouldn't invade any stronger alliance even without the US. If that said alliance has cohesion and will to fight as a block it would work the same as a deterrent as NATO. On the other hand, this crazy scare of Russia wanrinr to annex all eastern Europe holds no water as since the end of Soviet Union 30 years ago this is the first time they really invade any eastern Europe country after all those provocations from NATO. It's very hard to portrait someone as agressive in this situation...

[@KingOscar_1844]

@@ttuliorancao unless you missed the last ten years, Georgia (Abkhazia), Maldova (Transnistria), and Ukraine (Crimea and Donbas) would beg to differ. And watch your language. If you cannot discuss complex issues without using or resorting to vulvar language then don’t.

[@Mirakelmannen]

3:26 Ukraine was not promised membership. The secretary general at the time expressed his belief that Ukraine would become a member, but that is no guarantee or promise of future membership. While NATO has its' open door policy, NATO allies did't regard Ukranian membership as being realistic in the forseeable future.

[@marilenaganea6578]

What kind of promise anyone can make on the will of other nations?

[@krikukiks]

Its not about other nations. US is running NATO and they promised they wouldn't accept countries from east of Germany but they did. (although all countries are east of Germany if you encircle the globe. As they mentioned in video, they didn't say where the east ends) And NATO seems to be more of a excuse for Russia to attack rather than the main reason.

[@marilenaganea6578]

@@krikukiks "it's not about other nations"???? What are you talking about? Are you suggesting that my country didn't have the right to become a member because Russia said so and someone made "a pinky promise"???

[@jirachi-wishmaker9242]

@@marilenaganea6578 NATO should have been dismantled,when USSR collapsed.

[@skydragon23101979]

@@marilenaganea6578 You have the right to join the group. But the group have no right to accept new members if they don’t want to break their promise.

[@marilenaganea6578]

@@jirachi-wishmaker9242 the Russian danger didn't disappeared when USSR collapsed as proven by - Chechnya - Georgia - Syria And 24th of February 2022 Ukraine

[@Keymaster2022]

It’s it the choice of the people of the countries joining (or not joining) NATO. Not a promise made by 1990s politics s. Putin needs to chill…

[@DarkAraque]

Actually, not to expand is also not to recruit nor to accept new membership regardless of potential future members' wish or ambition to want to be part of the group.

[@reddecster]

Putin demands NATO not to expand, which is basically an elite membership club. But him doing annexation by force is alright. "Join the old soviet club again or die."

[@DarkAraque]

@Izuku Midoriya because the treaty discussed was NATO not expanding not the other way around. NATO failed to bring that to the table back then because in exchanges they had other compromise.

[@ppali11]

This German misinformation: "whether the promise should have been kept is up for debate". Disregard the decisions of eastern European countries and peoples

[@Ilohimushka]

Show me the document, mr Pupin

[@euclideszoto997]

The American Indians made over 1000 treaties with the USA. The USA broke everyone of them. USA said show us the treaties. They show them and the USA said Oh Well! Bill Bradley was 100% right.

[@nikakazz]

Look it up then, brainrot.

[@adamhymas4620]

It's like when a guy promises a girl to love her forever and ever and ever. That promise is highly contingent on her future actions and behavior.

[@spitalhelles3380]

especially if she stops existing 😂

[@oregonsbragia]

If Putin had such a problem with NATO, then why did he chose to invade a non-NATO country? Could it be because he is scared of NATO and knows that he would lose that fight.

[@lucasmate1582]

Exactly

[@ИванИванов-х1у4ы]

All countries will lose in NATO-Russian war. End of our civilization.

[@fungames24]

Makes sense for russia to invade the closest country first. Otherwise, it's hard to move the army to the target country. Neither you nor putin knows he will lose the fight. We will have to wait for the actual fight to know. He's unlikely to be scared in taking back from nato what nato took from Gorbachev. Historically, russia fought until the end anyone who tried to take stuff from it. I don't think this time will be different.

[@dannyarcher6370]

@@ИванИванов-х1у4ы Russian civilisation will end first.

[@ИванИванов-х1у4ы]

@@dannyarcher6370 Half of hour dont change nothing. Dead Hand in action.

[@peterroda4181]

Ukraine has the right to join any group.

[@skydragon23101979]

Yes Ukraine have the right. Now is not talking about Ukraine. Now is talking about NATO whether they broke their promise of not allowing new members.

[@ursodermatt8809]

@@skydragon23101979 now is time to talk about ukraine. you have absolutely no idea what they were talking about. do you?

[@keshasrivastav5491]

Exactly

[@skydragon23101979]

@@ursodermatt8809 Did you look at the topic? The whole topic is about NATO ‘s position and responsibility in this conflict.

[@ursodermatt8809]

@@skydragon23101979 like i said, you have absolutely no understanding what it is all about.

[@kingdong7517]

NATO is an alliance of free democtratic countries where the people can vote at any time to leave or join. What is Russia? Some things are more important than promises! Like freedom and the right to live without tyrany.

[@tasospanagiotou7823]

countries of NATO can leave? Have you ever spoken to greeks or visited Greece? We are the country with the most profound anti american population and at the same time for the last decades our governments have been the biggest US and NATO vassals in Europe. Our governments even assisted the US in the Iraq war even though the populations was clearly against it. Ask also what happened in montenegro. Where the majority of the population did not want to join NATO as it was shown in polls since the early 2000s. US and NATO and their government ignored them and admitted the country into the alliance.

[@mijicmugendo]

Russia has no say over anything. Stop letting them think they do

[@dannyevilcat]

But they do, though. They are the 800 lb gorilla living next door. Ignoring their concerns is what got us to this point.

[@sarlaz3407]

@@dannyevilcat Just tell the gorilla "bad boy" and throw some rocks at it...that will fix the problem.

[@defendfreedom1390]

@@dannyevilcat The gorilla has forgotten from that he had stolen Siberia from an Asian elephant.

[@user-ji3jy5wg4v]

Ofcourse they have a say at the end of the day Russia has dangerous weapons and Germany this exactly what Germany needs nuclear weapons because nato can't be trusted.

[@slabbygabby]

@@dannyevilcat No the fact that they have a crazy leader got us to this point.

[@roddy6924]

Putin: Worried about NATO expansion eastward Also Putin: Moves west towards NATO 🤦‍♂

[@Neilukuk]

Only 6% of Russia’s land borders touch NATO countries. Russia has land borders with 14 countries. Only five of them are NATO members.

[@Rondo2ooo]

@neil A Lmao... you are missing totally the point. Why would you include South and East borders when the discussion is about West borders? 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

[@soyounglee5985]

@@Neilukuk what would us do if russia has missiles in Mexico .do you think the us will sit and do nothing about .

[@Neilukuk]

@@soyounglee5985 Depends if it is nuclear. Ukraine isn't in NATO.

[@Neilukuk]

@@soyounglee5985 Mexico does not allow foreign military bases in its country, They can have anyone they like in it though. Russia is using NATO as an excuse to attack other countries and build back USSR.

[@jemassey45]

I believe Russia signed saying that if the Ukraine where to destroy all of its nuclear weapons at the time the Soviet Union was devolved, Russia would not invade or threaten the Ukraine.

[@TheYoutubeUser69]

who cares? its all about nato agression, i am sure of it

[@mypeeps333]

NO Biden said if they gave up their nuclear weapons The USA would be there for them in the event something was to happen

[@micumatrix]

They gave them to Russia. They didnt have the launch codes and money to keep them operating. And maybe it would generated a military response by Russia.

[@theeraphatsunthornwit6266]

There is also an agreement for ukrain to keep being neutral when it separared from soviet, which....

[@AntonioDal.]

Russia gave security guarantees to Ukraine and pledged to recognize its sovereignty. That alone would mean that it accepts that Ukrainians can shape their own country to their own will. Most Ukrainians support joining NATO, which is their own will.

[@Breznak]

I don't really care, what some american guy told some russian guy - I'm glad we (the Czech Republic) are a NATO member!

[@axelv1753]

So NATO should keep true to loose references to oral promises while Russia breaks signed treaties like they are flying by on a conveyor belt? What a joke. Anyone who takes that argument seriously is not for real.

[@exelsuremovers8889]

What treaties?

[@keiolge]

​@@exelsuremovers8889 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances where Ukraine in exchange for nuclear weapons was promised (in writting) Russia, US and UK will respect and protect their sovereignty.

[@axelv1753]

@@exelsuremovers8889 Correct Kamelia, and of course the Minsk agreement as well as international law as Russia has signed in the Geneva convention.

[@axelv1753]

And if we should start including word-of-mouth as Russia tries to request from the west: how about "we will not invade Ukraine". How is that for a promise from 4 weeks ago?

[@Khansaabkhan]

Cuba at one point wanted Russia to build its military base and guess what US said? They said we will declare war if Russia come.

[@tw0million]

it wasn’t a base, you dum b mook. They wanted to build launch pads for ballistic nuclear missiles. BIG difference. read a book

[@mikekelly5869]

This comment makes little sense. The issue in Cuba was related to the siting of missiles by the USSR at the height of the cold war, not to the building of an army base by Russia.

[@ben5056]

As was their right to say, Russia could’ve said the same when Eastern European countries joined NATO but they didn’t, because they couldn’t back it up with a real army (still can’t apparently)

[@Khansaabkhan]

@@tw0million god bless your family in Ukraine and in US

[@Check-it-out]

Pause @3:04 and read the paragraph for yourself. It is not phrased as a fact but as a mention that it ‘would be important’. This is not a guarantee at all ! The other two sources don’t contain any guarantees either.

[@joseywales898]

Changed our minds a long time ago.

[@SandyMcClintock]

USSR legal/prison as described by Solzhenitsyn was worse than barbaric. Sergei Magnitsky's treatment under Putin's rule was equally barbaric and used the same KGB-playbook. I would not want to live in a country controlled by Putin.

[@frankrenda2519]

russia hasnt got the death penalty the usa has i wouldnt want to live in the usa

[@iakusz]

amen

[@defendfreedom1390]

Eastern Europeans don't want to be under a country where the richest family are President's childhood friends.

[@franciscosaldana2879]

.l believe that Putin waited until now because he perceived US weakness: internal political division(Russian hacking )helped, covid mishandling, big debt and preoccupation with China. Europe was soft with prosperity and buying Russian energy. Now if you look at a map about 36% of Europe was under Russian domination, to me that means Europe was lucky to have some escape between Russia and the Atlantic. Also the Eastern European countries could not wait to be part of modern and prosperous Europe. Russia's demands for buffer zones is as if the US wanted to keep all of Mexico and Canada as buffer zones by force and dictate to them what they could or could not do. I understand the realpolitick but could it had been able to hold?

[@dufreversi42]

He thought comedian actor ukraine president is corrupted and weak a push over

[@ben5056]

He is an example of what happens when you are surrounded by people too scared to say no. Reality smacked him in the face, now we have a humanitarian tragedy.

[@babblo1389]

The west had been smacking Russia for 30 years, trying to impose western values and weaken their economy. No wonder they hit back. Besides they offered a security guarantee agreement negotiations in December 2021, that US proudly refused to talk about and only threatened with sanctions. What would you do if you get bullied and all your offers of mutual compromise are stepped upon?

[@Blanka1100]

@@ben5056 Never trust a man who is in power for over 20 years and kills his political opponents.

[@pavlovsdog2551]

Yes, the sly and devious opportunism Putin has shown, relieves the West of any guilt they might otherwise feel about the utter annihilation of Russian military and political power they are now undertaking with the help of their Ukrainian and other ex-Soviet partners...

[@tyroneuva-py1pg]

Russia broke its promise never to attack Ukraine.and cos of this country’s seek to protect themselves by joining a NATO agreement.

[@Blanka1100]

War in Ukraine was never about Nato expansion. Nato is an excuse for Putin. Putin simply wants to annex Ukraine. He does not consider Ukraine to be a real state. Al the rest is an excuse. Ukraine is not even Nato member country and had no chance to join in the nearest future.

[@akteno2796]

Even if, Russia promised to not attack Ukraine in a written down contract... And didn't hold it. Why would anyone else hold a contract with Russia from now on? Oh and please don't forget about the fact that the USSR does not exit anymore.

[@jetli740]

using your logic, if russia country change it name to something else it a new country so all sanction will be lifted as russia doesnt exist any more?

[@rexsceleratorum1632]

@@jetli740 If the Russian "federation" split up, do you think sanctions should still apply to every new nation, say Chechnya or Karelia?

[@SheryAwan123]

only if they remain neutral which they break

[@SK-lt1so]

You buy a car, you get everything in writing. To fight a war pretending someone "promised you" something is only an idea a "Moscow Mad Hatter" would actually propose.

[@warbler1984]

I say a gentleman's agreement shall keep the peace!

[@patriayvida6850]

LOL! There's nothing I enjoy more than watching a Zurdo (so-called Leftist), twisting himself into a pretzel in order to justify another war of convenience.

[@skydragon23101979]

It’s not pretending there’s plenty of evidence that verbal assurances was given that NATO would not expand an inch. To take your analogy when you buy a car after you have signed the agreement, you checked with the salesman that it includes free servicing for 3 years right and the salesman said yes. That is how it feels like.

[@TheLumberjack1987]

@@skydragon23101979 "not an inch into east germany" that's all and there are still no nato troops in east germany. Eastern European countries were never even discussed, Gorbachev confirmed as much.

[@bryanreed742]

@@skydragon23101979 I haven't seen that evidence. All the quotes in the video, in context, are clearly statements of opinion and/or hypotheticals.

[@larrowvolru7204]

Russian: if nato come to east again, we will do this again. that is the point. So just be where you belong to. that is the way of peace

[@theeraphatsunthornwit6266]

I wonder ukrainian will dare elect zelensky again after all these 😅

[@georgehouston6327]

Absolutely they will.

[@warrior4119]

Lol the way of peace is when Putin starts to respect his neighbors as equal human beings and stop annexing their territories and undermining their freedom

[@hueghh3775]

Who says Russia gets to dictate where NATO belongs? It’s not like they can use military force to keep it that way, what with the garbage logistics and exploding tanks.

[@Interitus1]

NATO's existence was being questioned more and more since it had essentially become pointless. But Putin couldn't see that. So he acted. Not only have more countries wanted to join. There is a renewed reason for the alliance and cohesion within most NATO members. Putin ended up being his own worst enemy. Or maybe it was never about NATO.

[@virtualyme7659]

NATO is not and has never been pointless

[@schlechtgut8349]

Putin himself in 2000's was ok with NATO expansion. He was even asked about Ukraine's desire to join NATO. He said that Ukraine is an independent country and is free to do whatever it wants.

[@solconcordia4315]

Putin couldn't live with our ignorant drunkard President's administration's attitude towards and treatment of the Russian Federation. Condoleeza Rice was the National Security Advisor appointed by shrub. She knew Russian and grew her career on the Cold War confrontation. She did know how weak economically the Russian Federation was relatively to the U. S. A. and acted accordingly putting it "in its place." In international relations, attitude matters. Knowing far too much can be detrimental. Of course, if one can filter that out before one expresses it, it's the "moral equivalent of not knowing" and tolerating. One eye wide shut can be a very valuable foreign policy. The U. S. A. has the original scene of slavery. Any African-ancestry-origin person rising to power are either exceptionally realistic, competent [and often abrasive because reality can bruise the egos of anachronistic people such as Putin] or capable of "code switching" such as Barack Obama. It's slavery by our southern plantation owners which had contributed to this current mess. It wouldn't have been a problem if the shrub were a hedge but alas ! We have White incompetent folks being figurehead jobs.

[@gutsblackswordsman4707]

@@schlechtgut8349 do you have any video link? hard to believe Putin ever said that.

[@tasospanagiotou7823]

@@schlechtgut8349 NATO had not killed Gaddafi and invaded Afghanistan and also NATO had not admitted a dozen eastern european countries yet which happened in 1999 and 2004. These things started breaking the trust and respect between Russia and NATO.

[@justiceforall2054]

Some Warsaw pack countries wants to join the West economy the US did not twist nobody arm to join Nato. Morally they join is the right thing to do for security

[@defendfreedom1390]

Eastern Europeans don't want to be under a country where the richest family are President's childhood friends.

[@cristi724]

"We have plundered and oppressed all these countries for decades but now we're upset they don't let us do it anymore so we will attack and it's their fault." - Russia

[@elimlinrr6898]

See if the USA will allow Russia or China to set up a military alliance and base in sovereign Cuba, pointing their missiles at Florida, USA. Why the double standards ? Remember Cuban missile crisis ?

[@cristi724]

@@elimlinrr6898 whataboutism much?

[@matthewhuszarik4173]

All discussions about not expanding NATO East was with the Soviet Union not Russia. Since many of the states who have joined NATO were equal members of the Soviet Union and have every right to wave the commitment as much as Russia wants to maintain it.

[@yogawan3805]

Lol read history again, how many times USSR or Russia want join NATO but get rejected.

[@benjapornsirivanta8402]

Nope, this agreement after Soviet Union was broken.

[@proselytizingorthodoxpente8304]

Putin obviously wanted to wave it too, cos he talked about the possibility of Russia joining NATO with Clinton in the early 2000s.

[@yogawan3805]

@@proselytizingorthodoxpente8304 no, atleast 3 times. U can search it 1. In 1954 2. During Yeltsin era 3. During Clinton Putin meeting

[@matthewhuszarik4173]

@@yogawan3805 You can’t join NATO unless you are a Democracy. There are other criteria Russia fails on as well like not invading your neighbors.

[@ozansimitciler5781]

Putin didn't make a fuss about it when baltics join the NATO. Plus NATO already rejected Georgia (then Russia invaded) and Ukraine, furthermore there was zero chance for them to accept Ukraine in any foreseeble future. Germany, Hungary, possibly France and Italy would have vetoed that anyway.

[@alextabet9247]

Clearly, Putin used NATO "expansion" as an excuse/pretext to violate Ukrainian sovereignty.

[@jpa5038]

No. This never happened. And NATO does not expand by conquering territory unlike the Soviet Union and the current Russian Federation. Sovereign nations voluntarily decide to join NATO.

[@anderskring]

Russia is not the Soviet Union. So if any promise was made, it was not made to Russia. Some of the new NATO-countries where part of the Soviet Union. They don’t seem to mind NATO expanding eastward.

[@williwass6837]

Sorry but that is wrong!Because Russia is the jursticated successor of the Udssr!If it wouldn be that way,Germany for example would not been reponsible for any war!

[@cesarmendoza5840]

@@williwass6837 yeah but the Russian’s seceded from the Soviet union thus not the same entities or their successor

[@artemvaka]

Russian "hawks" in response to such a statement say: "it would be necessary to return our half of Germany." If you want to continue this conversation in this way, then please continue. A full-scale World War III is still an option. Russians are the heirs of the USSR. You can prove the opposite to Putin and the Russians only through his/their corpses

[@keiolge]

​@@williwass6837 Well, Russian president Boris Yeltsin said NATO 1997 expansion was fine. Shouldn't we also respect his verbal approval? Since he was a "successor".

[@williwass6837]

@@keiolge Verbal "approval"means nothing in politics!if you dont understand this,and to this day didnt realize,you maybe should wake up!Even a Treaty has the possibility to mean nothing anymore after a succession!It should,but can be canceled!And a word of Jelzin means nothing under Putin or any other successor from Jelzin!

[@mrmarkspencer8314]

"Nato's current jurisdiction, will not expand".... That reads. existing nato countries will not expand eastward. That would not exclude eastern nations joining Nato.

[@brunowhitehead8105]

That was with the Soviet government not the Russian government

[@Ohhiohh]

Not signed

[@sebji9581]

@@brunowhitehead8105 Russia is the direct legal successor of the USSR, and all agreements with the USSR are relevant for Russia.

[@bigfig5219]

It was about East/West Germany and the unification. "Not another inch east" was in reference to military structures in East Germany. Gorbachev has clarified this himself.

[@alexkudryavtsev5059]

@@joedeleon1189 well, that means that they either lied and you are excusing a lie that has led to thousands of lives lost. Russia has explained that US and NATO is expanding at the expense of Russia's security. The red line in the sand was drawn in 2014. warning shots were fired. But as all imperialists, Americans are willing to fight Russians to the very last Ukrainian.

[@virawang9869]

I disagree with the Prof. Any oral promise by a government cannot be counted after its term. Also, even Gorbachev said in an interview that NATO expansion and Baker's statement was with regard to the unification of Germany. However, the question about whether NATO should have expanded is another issue.

[@mikekelly5869]

Exactly.

[@lterry3876]

USSR was too kind to agree the unification of Germany without getting any equivalent return. Naive in other words

[@DgurlSunshine]

@@lterry3876 USED

[@AleksandrKramarenko]

In the transcript of Gorbachev's and Baker's conversation a couple of things are mentioned that give context to the "no inch east" quote. After reading the full transcript, and other transcripts of Gorbachev, it becomes clear that no guarantee was made regarding the expansion of NATO into eastern Europe. During the Gorbachev-Baker conversation, the following was mentioned: - Baker and Gorbachev were discussing what to do in the potential event that east and west Germany would decide to unify. - They both were playing with the idea of keeping west Germany inside NATO, while east Germany would stay in the Warsaw Pact, even after the unification. - Baker ensures that NATO has no plans at that time to expand into east Germany. - They both explain they will respect whatever the Germans decide to do and they will help the transition, to keep the peace in Europe. - Baker near the end asks for clarification what Gorbachev would prefer after the unification: 1. A fully independent German military without NATO and without US troops; 2. Germany keeps the connection with NATO, but NATO guarantees not to expand east into east Germany. Gorbachev says he will need to think it over but a NATO expansion would be unacceptable. There are more transcripts of later meetings attended by Gorbachev. He agrees with western diplomats that Germany is bound to unite and has the wish to fully become part of NATO. Gorbachev and western diplomats then discuss what they will do to help facilitate the transition. Nothing is mentiond about NATO expanding into eastern Europe.

[@dxtrum]

I agree that after a govt's term it's promises are moot. But I understand why Russia wouldn't see it that way.

[@Yaxpacpa]

It's not so much that NATO is expanding; but more that former Soviet satellites are tired of being bullied by Russia.

[@tasospanagiotou7823]

why didnt they conduct referendums to all of eastern europe on the matter of joining NATO or not back in the 1990s? That would have been a great way by US and NATO to prove that they respect and value peoples opinions. There was only one referendum in Hungary in 1998.

[@jb76489]

@@tasospanagiotou7823 and 1986 in spain, 1997 in slovakia, 2003 in slovenia, 2018 in macedonia

[@tasospanagiotou7823]

@@jb76489 could you inform on the results?

[@casualobserver2000]

while i agree that west Nato seems rather disingenuous with their eastern expansion, that's a long way from justifying an attack on Ukraine. Putin had so many diplomatic options still available to him but he didnt use them.

[@GAZAMAN93X]

The same can be said for the West. Russian experts & folks in Western intelligence agencies have warned Western leadership to not expand but NOPE the West chose aggression Everytime .

[@goranrajcevic5550]

what diplomatic options did they not attempt?

[@teem5642]

What other diplomatic options where available? This issue regarding Ukraine didn't start today. Negotiations happened and nato promised it wouldn't go any further east, but hey, they opened their arms to Ukraine.

[@caravanstuff2827]

Yeah...it doesn't matter what NATO did or said...he was always going to invade Ukraine...this is as a result of him thinking the west has a "WEAKENED RESOLVE" because of the CHINESE BIOWEAPON...he obviously miscalculated as the sanctions that have been inflicted will hurt russia and the west but we will tuff it out until he's been "REMOVED" by his own people!!!.🤔

[@tw0million]

Russia wanted to join NATO in the 90's. They didn't have a problem with it then?

[@johanlindberg2712]

This video totally misses the national security implications of a hostile military alliance becoming able to place intermediate defensive missiles that can be converted quite rapidly into offensive missiles within minutes from your capital, and the effects of one of your strategic naval bases being converted into a base of your adversary. Those are the real implications of this step of NATO expansion, not the promises as such, although they were intended to avoid such effects. Please do better reporting.

[@williamwright7892]

Facts. Considering Russia lost the Cold War, which resulted in a large amount of lost land, power, and prestige for Russia, there is little reason for NATO to move Eastwards. Even more so, considering Ukraine was owned by Russia for a couple hundred years at this point. No way Russia is going to let NATO casually consider expanding into Ukraine. Prior to the west discussing NATO with Ukraine, Russia made no hostile moves towards Ukraine since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Lastly, what non-militaristic reason does the west have for wanting Ukraine to join NATO? The answer is none. Sure the potential of becoming economically closer to Ukraine is on the table, but NATO is not needed for that to happen, as NATO at its heart is a military alliance, with its initial purpose being to contain Soviet (aka communist) expansion. Ukraine has no value to the west, but absolute value to Russia. Would be like if the U.S. collapsed, and most of the country remained in the East, but the western states broke up, and China began talking about having California join in a military alliance with it. Are we really saying we, the U.S.A. would just let that happen? I don't believe we would, so why are we surprised that Russia won't let it happen?

[@flowerchild8450]

Repeat your question back to yourself in your mind slowly and carefully and then ask yourself honestly if a nuclear superpower would attack another nuclear superpower unprovoked? Dumbest thing I’ve heard. Surely it would make a little more sense that Eastern Euro countries want to move away from the Russian orbit due to Russia’s propensity to invade. But no, I’m sure your “America wants to launch missiles at Russia” hypothesis stands to much better reason.

[@domerame5913]

Is this a joke? Do you think it is the 1900s buddy ?

[@sassulusmagnus]

3:03 This is not a promise. Look at the language. It is an acknowledgement of the fact that the (then) Soviet Union and certain other European countries did not wish NATO to expand eastward. That's all it says. It is an aspirational statement at best, not a promise.

[@babblo1389]

James Baker did in FEB 1990, stenograms are a living proof. Not an inch eastwards. Besides: 🇺🇦🇺🇦 Ukraine's Independence declaration of Aug 1991 included non-aligned status and US did not recognize it's Independence until that declaration was put on nation-wide referendum in Dec 1991. (4 months!!! of waiting because oral promise before Moscow had to be approved by a majority of Ukraine's🇺🇦🇺🇦 population in the WRITTEN form). Be smart, Google it and don't let Media brainwash and fool you.🙄🙄 P.S. Ukrainian Independence Declaration is also aspirational document?? 😲😲😲

[@hyawill8944]

@@babblo1389 "We understand that not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the US keeps its presense in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO's present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction." Do you understand what is written here? Why it is specifically presense in Germany mentioned here? Why other European countries are mentioned here? It is clear from the context that it is a promise of not expanding into eastern Germany by NATO miltary forces which is given to the Soviet Union and its European allies like Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania. So it is a promise to the Warsaw Pact that eastern Germany won't be weaponised by NATO. But what happens next? Poland,Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians switch sides, Soviet Union collapses and Lithuania, Estonia,Latvia change sides, Ukraine with time wishes to change alliance. Deal with it. There was a promise to Warsaw Pact members that NATO will not weaponize eastern Germany. It is clear.

[@defendfreedom1390]

@@hyawill8944 USSR ceased to exist. NATO leaders have never signed any treaty that they would not admit new members. On the other hand Russia SIGNED a treaty that it guarantees borders and independence of of Ukraine. Shevardnadze himself wanted Georgia to join NATO.

[@IloveCamels335]

That is so ridiculous. People can turn things around as much as they want but the truth is still the truth and this was promised to the Soviet Union back then which would be applicable to Russia now.

[@rexsceleratorum1632]

@@IloveCamels335 It was verbally promised that NATO troops wouldn't move into East Germany after unification, and the promise was made to the Warsaw pact and USSR. Kind of obsolete right now, since the status quo of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR have changed majorly