http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-17/nato-to-rebuff-russian-bid-for-separate-treaty-officials-say.html


Bloomberg News
January 18, 2010


NATO to Rebuff Russian Bid for Separate Treaty, Officials Say
By James G. Neuger


-Western governments have been cool to the Medvedev initiative, a product of 
the Kremlin’s desire to overhaul European security arrangements after NATO’s 
eastward enlargement put western troops on Russia’s borders.
“There can be no doubt whatsoever that NATO will remain our framework for 
Euro-Atlantic security,” Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said last 
month.


NATO is likely to rebuff a Russian proposal for a bilateral security treaty, 
seeing it as a ploy to regain lost influence over eastern Europe [sic], four 
allied officials said.

The initiative marks a Russian bid to...halt the Brussels-based North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization’s expansion. The proposal, made last month, would have 
effectively given Russia a veto over allied military planning, especially in 
eastern Europe, said the officials, who declined to be named because the 
alliance hasn’t issued a formal response.

“It’s a way of trying to put into treaty an acceptance of a Russian sphere of 
influence,” said Kurt Volker, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO who is now 
managing director of Johns Hopkins University’s trans-Atlantic relations center 
in Washington. “It essentially gives Russia a veto over countries that are not 
yet members of NATO.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov handed the proposed “Agreement on Basic 
Principles Governing Relations Among NATO- Russia Council Member States in 
Security Sphere” in Russian and English versions to allied officials without 
publicity at a NATO-Russia meeting in Brussels Dec. 4

NATO-Russia Cooperation

While NATO aims to boost cooperation with Russia on the war in Afghanistan, 
fighting piracy and stemming nuclear proliferation, there is little appetite 
for a new treaty, said the four NATO officials.
,,,,
Asked if NATO-Russia ties need a new legal basis, the alliance’s supreme 
military commander, U.S. Admiral James Stavridis, said his focus is on 
practical steps such as expanding the supply lines through Russia for the 
100,000-plus western troops in Afghanistan.
....

Obama ‘Reset’

The Lavrov paper, coming as President Barack Obama seeks to “reset” relations 
with the Kremlin, is distinct from a wider East-West security treaty also 
floated last year by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

Western governments have been cool to the Medvedev initiative, a product of the 
Kremlin’s desire to overhaul European security arrangements after NATO’s 
eastward enlargement put western troops on Russia’s borders.

“There can be no doubt whatsoever that NATO will remain our framework for 
Euro-Atlantic security,” Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said last 
month.

NATO absorbed former Soviet allies starting in 1999, when a Russia shorn of its 
Cold War satellites was struggling to regain its economic footing after 
defaulting on $40 billion of debt.
....
Russia pushed back against further NATO enlargement by ***invading 
western-leaning Georgia in August 2008 and trying to reassert control over 
Ukraine***, which held the first round of presidential elections yesterday.

No Choice
....
Putin has accused NATO of violating a 1998 pledge not to permanently station 
“substantial combat forces” on former Warsaw Pact territory. The new treaty 
would potentially allow Russia to weigh in on NATO defense policies such as the 
air policing mission over the three Baltic republics, once part of the Soviet 
Union.

NATO has pointed to the 56-nation Organization for Security and Cooperation in 
Europe, an East-West forum created in 1975, as the best arena for discussing 
Russia’s security concerns.

--Editors: James Hertling, Steve Rhinds
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
 
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwroz...@yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscr...@yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.
==============================



Reply via email to