Skip to main content

US 'violating' assurance to Gorbachev: NATO not to expand jurisdiction to eastern Europe

By Bharat Dogra* 

At a time when the Russian invasion of Ukraine has faced a lot of well-justified criticism, a different yet related question also needs to be raised. Would Ukraine have become such a serious crisis point if the USA had sincerely adopted a policy of peace towards Russia during the last 35 years or so?
Revisit Russia of three decades back. There was confusion at the rapid break-up, a lot of uncertainty. A sincere hand of friendship by the superpower would have been enough for Russia to accept a less than equal position in the arrangement, as long as it was treated honorably. Unfortunately, the USA and allies adopted a policy of hostility, which came to the fore at the time of decisions relating to the eastward expansion of NATO.
An important understanding reached between Gorbachev and Bush in 1989 was that the USA will not expand NATO membership eastwards close to Russian borders. Jack F Matlock, then US ambassador to the Soviet Union and a leading expert on Soviet policy for years, had a ringside view of crucial talks. He recalled recently (February, 15 2022, "Responsible Statecraft"), Gorbachev was assured, though not in a formal treaty, that if a unified Germany was allowed to remain in NATO, there would be no movement of NATO’s jurisdiction to the east, not one inch.”
However the USA started drifting away -- fast -- from this assurance. 1997 was a landmark year for this going back on an important assurance. At this critical juncture, on June 26 1997 to be precise, as many as 50 prominent foreign policy experts, including former senators, retired military officers, diplomats and academicians sent an open letter to President Clinton, outlining their opposition to NATO expansion (see full statement at the Arms Control Association, Opposition to NATO Expansion).
They wrote, “We, the undersigned, believe that the current US led effort to expand NATO, … is a policy error of historic proportions. In Russia NATO expansion, which continues to be opposed across the entire political spectrum, will strengthen the non-democratic opposition, undercut those who favor reform and cooperation with the West, bring the Russians to question the entire post- cold war settlement, and galvanize resistance in the Duma to the START II and III treaties.”
This letter of 50 experts concluded: “We strongly urge that the NATO expansion process be suspended while alternative actions are explored.” The alternatives suggested by these experts included “supporting a NATO-Russia relationship.”
Around the same time in 1997 Ambassador Matlock was asked to testify before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He stated that NATO expansion would be the most strategic blunder since the end of the Cold War.
Ignoring such sane advice from many senior diplomats and foreign policy experts, the US government went ahead with several waves of adding new NATO members -- eastward ho! At the same time, the USA was also withdrawing from important arms control treaties. During the nineties western interests were associated with pushing economic policies of the Yeltsin years which impoverished a large number of Russians, leading to a deeply worrying, steep fall of life expectancy.
The expectations of many Russians for economic help and accommodation of essential security concerns were neglected and instead they saw repeated violation of their economic and security interests. In addition sanctions were also imposed. In 2014 the USA intervened decisively in Ukraine, playing an important role in installing an anti-Russian regime.
In 2019 the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace published a study titled ‘30 Years of US Policy Toward Russia—Can the Vicious Circle be Broken’ which expressed regret at the many problems created by hostile US policy. 
In 1997 Ambassador Matlock stated that NATO expansion would be the most strategic blunder since the end of the Cold War
To break the impasse, the study concluded, the USA will have to, for its part, make several key adjustments to its Russia policy, including -- halting NATO expansion eastward, clarifying to Ukraine and Georgia that they should not base their foreign policy on the assumption that they will be joining NATO (while establishing robust security cooperation in other ways), reviewing and restraining sanctions policy towards Russia and leaving Russia’s internal affairs to itself (not interfering in them).
These and other suggestions have been ignored by US policy makers who continued to indulge in provocations. Just before war broke out, Matlock posed a question (see “Responsible Statecraft",  February 15, 2022: "I was there—NATO and the origins of the Ukraine Crisis”): Was the crisis avoidable? His answer was –Yes.
He explained, “Since Putin’s major demand is an assurance that NATO will take no further members, and specifically not Ukraine or Georgia, obviously there could have been no basis for the present crisis if there had been no expansion of the alliance following the end of the Cold War, or if the expansion had occurred in harmony with building a security structure in Europe that included Russia.”
So while the invasion of Ukraine deserves the criticism it is getting, the genuine concerns of Russia also deserve attention. In the longer-term and a wider context, USA led west and the already troubled world will gain nothing and lose a lot from a policy of encircling and threatening a big nuclear weapon power like Russia. 
A century earlier Germany in difficult times, trying to find a rightful place of honor, was pushed and shoved too much, and the rest is very unfortunate history. The situation now in a world of weapons of mass destruction is of course much more risky.
Surely USA and western decision makers have the wisdom to see the bigger picture. The talk in the street is of the USA arms companies getting more business, Germany and Japan being pushed towards acquiring more destructive weapons in cooperation with the USA, fuel market of Europe getting more tied to USA interests despite clear advantages of getting better and cheaper supplies much nearer from Russia. Surely western and US policy makers should be able to rise above such narrow concerns.
Clearly a different path exists, a path based on peace and sincerity, and by making this the basis of its Russia policy the USA can contribute much more to its self-interests and even more to world peace. This can also contribute very quickly to resolving the ongoing crisis, and in the longer-term to creating a safer world for this and future generations.
---
*Honorary convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include “Planet in Peril” and “Protecting Earth for Children”

Comments

TRENDING

Reducing emission? India among top nations whose coal as energy source going up

By NS Venkataraman*  The State of the Global Climate report by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) confirmed that the year 2023 was the warmest year on record, with the global temperature of 1.4 degree celsius above pre-industrial 1850-1900 base line.

Lockdown 'total failure' of science more than of politics: Open letter on 4th anniversary

Counterview Desk  In an open letter to fellow academicians, scientists and medical practitioners in India, marking the fourth anniversary of India's lockdown (25 March 2024), the Managing Committee* of the Universal Health Organisation (UHO) has insisted on the need to "repair two years of immense damage to science".

Insider plot to kill Deendayal Upadhyay? What RSS pracharak Balraj Madhok said

By Shamsul Islam*  Balraj Madhok's died on May 2, 2016 ending an era of old guards of Hindutva politics. A senior RSS pracharak till his death was paid handsome tributes by the RSS leaders including PM Modi, himself a senior pracharak, for being a "stalwart leader of Jan Sangh. Balraj Madhok ji's ideological commitment was strong and clarity of thought immense. He was selflessly devoted to the nation and society. I had the good fortune of interacting with Balraj Madhok ji on many occasions". The RSS also issued a formal condolence message signed by the Supremo Mohan Bhagwat on behalf of all swayamsevaks, referring to his contribution of commitment to nation and society. He was a leading RSS pracharak on whom his organization relied for initiating prominent Hindutva projects. But today nobody in the RSS-BJP top hierarchy remembers/talks about Madhok as he was an insider chronicler of the immense degeneration which was spreading as an epidemic in the high echelons of th

Magnetic, stunning, Protima Bedi 'exposed' malice of sexual repression in society

By Harsh Thakor*  Protima Bedi was born to a baniya businessman and a Bengali mother as Protima Gupta in Delhi in 1949. Her father was a small-time trader, who was thrown out of his family for marrying a dark Bengali women. The theme of her early life was to rebel against traditional bondage. It was extraordinary how Protima underwent a metamorphosis from a conventional convent-educated girl into a freak. On October 12th was her 75th birthday; earlier this year, on August 18th it was her 25th death anniversary.

Savarkar 'criminally betrayed' Netaji and his INA by siding with the British rulers

By Shamsul Islam* RSS-BJP rulers of India have been trying to show off as great fans of Netaji. But Indians must know what role ideological parents of today's RSS/BJP played against Netaji and Indian National Army (INA). The Hindu Mahasabha and RSS which always had prominent lawyers on their rolls made no attempt to defend the INA accused at Red Fort trials.

'Flawed' argument: Gandhi had minimal role, naval mutinies alone led to Independence

Counterview Desk Reacting to a Counterview  story , "Rewiring history? Bose, not Gandhi, was real Father of Nation: British PM Attlee 'cited'" (January 26, 2016), an avid reader has forwarded  reaction  in the form of a  link , which carries the article "Did Atlee say Gandhi had minimal role in Independence? #FactCheck", published in the site satyagrahis.in. The satyagraha.in article seeks to debunk the view, reported in the Counterview story, taken by retired army officer GD Bakshi in his book, “Bose: An Indian Samurai”, which claims that Gandhiji had a minimal role to play in India's freedom struggle, and that it was Netaji who played the crucial role. We reproduce the satyagraha.in article here. Text: Nowadays it is said by many MK Gandhi critics that Clement Atlee made a statement in which he said Gandhi has ‘minimal’ role in India's independence and gave credit to naval mutinies and with this statement, they concluded the whole freedom struggle.

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

By Rajiv Shah*   The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual. 

'Wrong direction': Paris NGO regrets MNC ArcelorMittal still using coal-based steel

By Rajiv Shah  A new report by Paris-based non-governmental research and campaigning organization, Reclaim Finance, has blamed the MNC ArcelorMittal – formed in 2006 following the takeover and merger of the western European steel maker Arcelor (Spain, France, and Luxembourg) by Indian-owned Mittal Steel – for using use “climate destructive” metallurgical coal for its projects in India.

Attack on foreign students: Gujarat varsity's reputation, ranking at stake, say academics

Counterview Desk  Expressing anguish over the attack on international students in Gujarat University hostels, a letter claimed to have been signed by 122 current and former academics has asked the Gujarat Vice Chancellor, Dr Neerja Gupta, to provide emotional support to the attacked students and to ensure their physical safety.  

Poor private sector engagement 'impacting' carbon pricing policy in Global South

Counterview Desk  The joint report by Environmental Defense Fund and Observer Research Fund, "Navigating Carbon Pricing: The G20 Experience and Global South Prospects", delves into the complex landscape of carbon pricing, examining its application within the G20 nations and the potential implications for emerging economies in the Global South.  The report claims to provide insights and recommendations for effective carbon pricing strategies in diverse economies.  A note: The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and Observer Research Foundation (ORF) have launched the Navigating Carbon Pricing: The G20 Experience and Global South Prospects” report. The report delves into the complex landscape of carbon pricing, examining its application within the G20 nations and the potential implications for emerging economies in the Global South. The report offers a comprehensive analysis of various carbon pricing instruments currently in existence, providing valuable i