I love the name of the article. It seems that when we are paranoid it is our normal state of mind. Also it is a pleasure to see that there are guys who are absolutely wrong and absolutely right. It was a normal situation under the communists but how nice that it is possible nowadays too.
Anyway, there are obviously several sorts of European countries. Some have a right to be in such organizations as they want to and some, as the Ukraine, not. I think that the next necessary step is to boot our from NATO Lithuania and Estonia by Medvedev’s demand

Bayukov, Moscow, Russia

True, when russia turns of the gas will america pay the bill.

michael joseph , cahersiveen>adams towns, madness

Rob, you are correct is stating that some Russians interpret their country's history in a skewed way. It is disturbing to me personally. Knowing the subject first hand though I can assure you that this only applies to a small minority of the population.

I believe Anatole's article is spot on. There is a strong resentment in Russia of NATO's unchecked expansion across the political spectrum. In fact, there isn't a political figure who thinks it is a good thing for either Russia or Europe.

Igor Zotkin, Leatherhead, England

Howard of London criticises the ignorance of the commentators here. Unfortunately, the Russians who all pride themselves on their supposedly superior education system are showing themselves to be less well informed than their western counterparts.

There are those who suggest that western countries did not help the USSR in WW2 and even that we wanted the Nazis to beat Russia!

Not suprisingly they assert that eastern european countries and republics all chose to join the Soviet Bloc. Unfortunately the falsehood that the carve-up of eastern Europe by Hitler and Stalin in their pact was just a treaty of non-aggression (like Munich) is being propagated once again, as is denial of Stalins atrocities. The truth is out there!

How many Westerners know that Russians were all taught that the US was never at war with Japan but A-bombed H & N just to demonstrate their new terror weapon! (just one other example)

There are none so ignorant as they who have been lied to all their lives.

Rob, Aldershot, UK

The ignorance of a large majority of the commentators on this subject with regard to history, geography and politics is truly staggering, not to mention the appalling xenophobic and nationalist rhetoric.

Get real people - Russians, Ukrainians, Western Europeans, Americans...should we be having this kind of unhealthy talk.

Re-examine the real dangers in the world, new dangers, new enemies and work together both as governments and people and try to better identify truth from propaganda, fact from fiction.

God, you people depress me !

Howard, London, UK

It should be agreed by all current NATO states, the NATO should not be used by potential future participants as a political tool to oppress their own populace. That being obvious, I am suprised that this commentator has so quickly forgotten the disasterous results of appeasment to Russia by allied forces after the end of WWII. Secondly, Ras Putins retorical question "and we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended?" seems to infer that the formation of NATO was for "against" and not for 'prevent"

ken r, Wuhan, China

We (south ukrainians) are russians and don't join NATO!!!

Alexandr, Zaporozhie, South Ukraine

Jim from NY say that the West better learn to defend itself, for either Russia or Islam is going to give them an old school lesson.
It's cruel. The last time Westerns try to give us that "old school lessson" War lasts about seven years. Many millions of peoples was dying during this horrible time, not only from guns & bombs. And what now? Americans want new war in the Europe, just to make some new cash from dead bodies, or for what?

Omen, Vladivostok, Russia

Peter, you wrote: "When Russia expanded its borders towards us via the Warsaw pact we felt agressed against and formed NATO as a defence."

When was NATO formed and when was the Warsaw Treaty of Friendship signed? Answer this question and then tell me, who felt agressed.

Dmitry, Moscow, Rssia

Isn't it up to Ukraine and Georgia as to whether they wish to join NATO? NATO has not offered them membership because they are afraid of angering Russia, but if membership is not offered, it will only be because NATO has been intimidated. I say that if Ukraine and Georgia can meet the standards met by other recent NATO countries, such as Poland, and if those countries wish to join, then they should be allowed. Arguing that they shouldn't be admitted because they have too many ethnic Russians puts me in mind of Hitler's arguments about ethnic Germans in Czechoslovakia's Sudentenland. By that logic, eventually America will have to repatriate New Mexico and California to Mexico because of the high number of ethnic Mexicans. The West better learn to defend itself, for either Russia or Islam is going to give them an old school lesson.

Jim, New York City, NY USA

herr speyer , in spite of mishandling the vietnam war AFTER kennedy died, there was the same game that communists in north korea played in imposing their totalitarianism on their south .
the west has enemies that will exploit any unwarranted gentleness.the soviets for example pumped $2billion into the vietnam peaceprotest movement . this during the same era of
the soviet invasion of prague. if the west was as bad as you suggest , then the u.s. would have forced stalin to withdraw his
mongels from europe in 1946 with atomic bombs .
btw , comparisons between the us and ussr are absurd .you would't find even american black people chosing to migrate to russia even during segregation!defectors fled WEST.
i certainly know that not one of my ancesters was exiled to the arctic for engaging in antistate expression(whereas most every soviet family lost a member to gulags ).
under the geneva convention , troops are allowed to execute undeclared enemy combatants , not just ship to guantano!

barry dean, toronto, canada

We are hypocrites. When Russia expanded its borders towards us via the Warsaw pact we felt agressed against and formed NATO as a defence. We lack the imagination to see that Russia now feels exactly as we did after WW2.

Peter, Oxford,

you said about "paid"
lots of the things were sold to us by our allies, and the US and UK thought about making peace with Germany in WWII and had contacts to some people of the "SS" behind the back of Russia.
And the UK&US had its own interest in winning WWII, and a fact is that without our people you wouldnt have won, cause your countrys werent ready for sacrificing that much (around 30 million people) to win a war
if you consider that as help then look at Alaska as our help-we sold it really cheap (some houses cost more than Alaska)

Alexander, Speyer, Germany

"did you help Russia ever?"

Uh, Alexander, what about all the lend-lease equipment? Planes, guns, ammunition, food, etc that helped Russia invade and defeat Germany in WWII, and oh yeah which Russia has yet to pay for.

The question, perhaps should have been what has Russia ever done for the U.S.?

Ed, Houston, Tx

I want to know one little thing
why is it bad that Putin risked his life for his country (agents dont live long and free), but theres no problem with anyone of the west havind an CIA/MI5/MI6/BND past?

And the NATO is responsible for a lot of evil too, why always forget about how they killed civilists in Vietnam,Iraq and other countrys
Or the little democratic prison "Guantanamo" on Kuba where they help to give the world the "human rights"

Alexander, Speyer, Germany

For everybody else, who have presented their opinion carefully and supported it with logical arguments avoiding hysterical mottos, I respect your opinion even if it is the same with the groups described above. I think that West Europe is treating Russia with fear because of the same old Cold War mentality: Russia is constantly plotting to grab some unfortunate country's land. U.S. does not believe that, but that fear at the moment is helping it to boost its European influence. In reality, Russia is too busy dealing with internal economic booms and domestic problems to be an aggressor. As for the missile shield and NATO talks, I really want to see U.S.'s or any other country's reaction to such measures (Caribbean crisis analogy works well). NATO sounds great as a protection measure, but the politicians are conviniently forgetting how easily NATO is manipulated by U.S. for its own political gain. Another reason for Russians not to trust NATO is that it was originally built against them.

Aleksey, Philadelphia, U.S.

It's funny how some are too ready to jump on the band wagon and criticise US and Bush completely forgetting about Putin's KGB past and all evil in the post-war world that Soviet Union was responsible for. Leave the decision to Georgians and Ukrainians. They DO have the right to chose their future and it's extremely cynical of us in the West to expect them to shut up just so that we can enjoy uninterrupted gas supplies.

Dan K, London, UK

Actually, the two main arguments of the article contradicts to itself:
1) NATO expansion is an aggression to Russia, and Russia has the full right to defend itself
2) Ukraine's and Georgia's will to join NATO is motivated by wish to have protection against Russia's interference.
That means that Ukraine's and Georgia's accession to NATO can be only a defensive move, not an aggressive one towards Russia.

Ukraine is maybe the most interested in good relations between the West and Russia. The only one question is on what basis?

If this basis means that Russia maintains its area of influence on post Soviet republics (as Russia wants) - we oppose it.

The best way for the West to make Russia more cooperative is via integrating Ukraine. The example of a European Ukraine would bring such a strong influence on Russia that no other West's move can do.

So, if you want Russia as West's ally - take Ukraine into NATO and EU. If you want Russia as empire - leave Ukraine out.

Dmytro, Kyiv, Ukraine

If it wasn't for Russia this discussion may have been auf Deutsch , regardless of what those across the pond like to spout .
Russia should be an important ally .

Benzo, Nr Chelmsford,

Respect Russia and work out a solution. If Islamic extremism is the real enemy, surely an ally such as Russia would be beneficial to the issue?
Let Russia join and keep surrounding Iran with Nato forces until Iran gets the point to stop threatening the world with islamic domination. Then invade the taliban areas of Pakistan until it is cleansed regardless of what Pakistan says. Once all this is finished we can work on bringing China,Indonesia and Nth Korea into normality - trade and dialogue to resolve issues.
I think its pretty pathetic how all Europe seems to do is whine over the past. Get over it everyone, the day of Kings and Rulers and their empires is over. How about you forget about pathetic things called borders and live in harmony. You can still keep your dogma ritual names through municpalities of local councils that are part of the EU... Better yet, come to Australia and understand what a new democracy with little history can do for your beleif structure!

Max, Sydney, Australia

Everyone seeks the problem in the wrong place, it is not the russian's or the lack of democracy's fault that Georgia is not given the membershio action plan. Russia did not stop West when it let in the baltic states and most of the eastern European states, and neither did the low rate of democracy in Albania prevent Nato to offer it a membership.
It is simply a long time policy of the Europe of ingoring Georgia's asking for help. Like noone helped Georgia against the muslim invasions in the middle ages and Europe never even tried to help Georgians against Russia in the last 200 years. Considering that and the Summit's decision I do not think that Georgia will ever get the membership, so I ask the question, why should Georgians even bother to ask for Nato membership, maybe they should simply turn back to Russia.

Hercules, London, UK

What transparent nonsense for Russia to pretend to feel threatened! It only fears its influence being diminished.
The West has never trusted Russia and NATO was formed to face its threat. From its birth it has been the most predatory and expansionist state, resting only in periods of internal stress. Ukraine knows this better than any. NATO and Russia’s neighbours are right to maintain their guard. With its new found political and economic strength, and signs of a creeping return to totalitarianism, Russia cannot come to terms with any barrier to its hopes of reviving its former hegemony over its neighbours.

candre, Livingston, Scotland

I think the Russians are getting a little high on themselves. The reality is that no one in the US had seen Russia as a threat or an entity that needed containment until very recently - when Russia under Putin started unilaterally and without cause behaving in an irrational and threatening manner (i.e. cutting gas supplies, murdering dissidents and doing silly fly-bys off of Western coast lines).

In fact, the neocons (who, newsflash for all Europeans who love to paint them as bogeymen, have long been thoroughly discredited in America and even the Bush Administration as the Iraq war soured) were actually among the biggest friends of Russia post-9/11, seeing Russia as a potentially powerful ally in the war against radical Islam given its own experience in Chechya.

After 9/11, the US saw its threats as radical Islam primarily, and possibly China - certainly not Russia. Perhaps it was this that really irked that the Russians, and has prompted their childish Cold War throwbacks.

H Juneja, London, UK

It's interesting to observe how all Western readers are still thinking in Cold War terms. Russia repeatedly demonstrated in the last 15 years that it doesn't want war or an arms race. But all Russia had for this was more NATO expansion. The line had to be drawn, and it was. How can you compare current Russia with Germany in 20-s? Russia is much richer, stronger and it has nukes. If US (NATO) will get an idea to treat Russia like Iraq, these nukes will be used, and living will envy the dead. So why not to have Russia on the West side? Why West supports any idiot who tries to kick Russia? Where is the common sense? Western polititians have to learn that things have changed, the reality is different. Russia will be even stronger, because there is no more communism dogma, it's being lead by a pragmatic leadership. The West still lives in Cold War dogmas and it's already failing to BRIC countries. The article above just proves the dogmatic thinking, it has no new ideas, simply propaganda.

Oleg, Toronto, Canada

Yes, we, Ukrainians, will join NATO and will start to prepare a tank attack from Kharkiv to Moscow :-) This is a real paranoia!

Or maybe 4000 Estonian and 5000 Latvian troops on Russia's border are prepared to attack Peterburg?

No foreign (NATO) bases on Ukrainian soil are possible according to the constitution of 1996; it has only a temporary exception for the Russian fleet in Sevastopol which was already there.

So no military threat to Russia from NATO and from Ukraine's NATO membership. The only reason for Kremlin's histeria is the loss of its influence on internal political and economic life in Ukraine, as perceived a part of Moscow's superpower status.

If NATO wants to tolerate Russia's post-imperial syndroms - go ahead and dissolve NATO altogether. That would be your choice if you really want to please Putin.

Dmytro, Kyiv, Ukraine

Alexander from Speyer you need to get your facts straight. First of all Korea was not a NATO war, it was launched by the North Koreans and was responded to by the United Nations.And oh, the Russians were most definitely involved in the fight, as well as China. They provided advisers, pilots and war materials to the North Vietnamese in their fight. In addition, it was again the UN not NATO in the first Gulf war.Lest you forget, besides Afghanistan, how about Chechnya, and let's also not forget the crushing of the Czechs by the Russians, and the mass murder of millions by Stalin.There were also many attempted uprisings in eastern bloc countries that were crushed by the Russians before they ever got started.

I can certainly appreciate the Russian concern about NATO expansion, but don't try to portray them as innocents, it just doesn't hold up in light of the facts.Had the United States not opposed the Soviets after the cold war they would have continued to push westward themselves.

Ian, Austin, TX, USA

I visited a tech conference on Ukraine two years ago. My impression was mixed. Our Russian were full of energy, plans, ideas and backed by very good money and positive mood in our country. Ukrainian colleagues looked at crumbs from the Russian table. Ukrainian economy is deeply linked on Russia. Ukrainian aero-planes, turbines and so on are not really welcome on western markets. Russian language was native for most the people on the conference. Many of us have relatives on Ukraine.
And all these anti-Russian games disrespect our long and mainly positive common history, deep economic and just human ties.

Mikhail, Penza, Russia

Russia would be a powerful ally to have on board. It is a mistake to antagonize Russia.One would think that the US would have realized by now that it is not calling all of the shots.

Em, Ottawa,

I remember attending a series of military lectures at RMAS Sandhurst on the Soviet Union. The opening slide was a map of the Soviet Union ringed by Nato airbases. The opening words were, "Gentleman, if you want to understand the Russian military mindset, this map says it all. They fear invasion from the West as the ordinary man fears castration". Needless to say, from that moment on, the lecturer had a very attentive audience. However, the insight of that statement still holds true today. Russia has more to fear from us, than we do of them. We need to give them some slack.

Nick Ferriman, Bangkok, Thailand

A lot of you say that russia is bad and all the things...
BUT
who started the most wars since WWII?
Russia only had an war against Afganistan 1988
The NATO had lots more: for example the 2 Iraq wars and Afganistan, Korea, Vietnam

Russia messing around in the affairs of ukraine and georgia? yes, but in Ukraine a lot of people are russians and the "democratic" government of the Ukraine for example forbid russian television. In Georgia its two provinces which the population of which is mainly russians

and why should the west have influence on countrys worldwide and Russia isnt allowed to have influence on the neifhbours

if it comes to Iran-why should Russia or China help the NATO? did you help Russia ever?

Alexander, Speyer, Germany (born in Russia)

"Would the US accept Mexico joining a Russian dominated military pact?"

Have you ever heard of Cuba? Castro? Does that ring a bell? It's not Mexico, but it's just as close to the US (about 90 miles).

Haile, Cleveland, USA

Those who want to answers in curent political decissions of the Leaders of Western Hemisphere, I kindly recommend to watch once again phophetic film called "Mad Max 2 ".
I agree - it all about GREED AND OIL & GAS RESERVES !

Chapaurai, Cochin, India

Don`t see, Europeans, that George Bush (read Uncle Sam) is ruling Europe. Shortly you should rename the EC into the United States of Europe (read America-2).
Congratulations.

Victor, Moscow,

I think Europeans have to have a choice soon again. EU isn't look like a one good solidarity country. And all defence or military plans of EU depend from NATO alliance. But its' not alliance. It's seems like a one big ship USA and small and too small boats. But the boats don't have own course and looks like blinds follow USA. But maybe in front the iceberg and captain of big ship blind too?
In future US can declare war to somebody else. Iran? And what you will do after? EU solders will be fight in Iran, Irak, Afganistan like a legioners of mad guys in white house?
it's much better to have own pride and good relationships with your neighbors.

Igor, Moscow, Russia

Ukrainians should be left in peace to work out their own defence and foreign policies.

In the past 100 years, Ukraine has suffered two world wars, several invasions, revolution, civil war, a genocidal famine, ethnic cleansing and the totalitarian state. For its role in these events, Russia has remained totally unapologetic. Russia continues to interfere in Ukrainian domestic affairs and many Ukrainians fear that Russia is seeking excuses to “intervene”. Creeping dictatorship, the crackdown on opposition and Chechen-style ethnic suppression are reminders of what awaits Ukraine should it fall once again under Russian control.

We should not begrudge the Ukrainians seeking alliances, especially powerful ones like NATO.

Mike, Manchester,

It's strange to me to read words like "the rulers of Russia decide to reconquer the neighboring lands" or "we in the west fundamentally do not trust Russia under Putin/Medvev not to return to its really ugly authoritarian and thus likely expansionist ways".
It`s only words. Russia after Soviet Union don`t had wars on territories other countries and don`t added new lands. But US and NATO bombed Iraq and Serbia, NATO CONQUER THE NEIGHBORING LANDS and go by EXPANSIONIST WAYS.
It`s reason why russians FUNDAMENTALLY DO NOT TRUST NATO and USA not to bomb Russia. It may be because US president will think that russians too hard fight against Chechenya's murderers and terrorists only.
Article is really good.
Good luck.

Konstantin, Moscow, Russia

I agree with one the earlier comments. Would the US accept Mexico joining a Russian dominated military pact? From what I've read the majority of Ukranians don't want this to happen - surely that should have some bearing on this? I'm all for democracy but in this case I think the Russians have a legitimate point.

James, London,

Some interesting points, but conclusions are too liberal. I'm afraid taking Russia into account or not, NATO has only two options: to integrate Georgia and Ukraine into the alliance or in few years to send troops with peace / bomb mission. If "George W. Bush is absolutely wrong" that the first way is more rational, welcome.

Walter, L'viv, Ukraine

I have to draw the attention, that it isn't Russia becoming "paranoid", it is the West, especially myopic policies of it''s leaders which, have been allowed far too long to abuse the trust of voters and citizens of their countries, cunningly diverting attention from their local problems to elsewhere.
These myopic foreign policies destabilises the world order and ballance of power ; instead of engaging Russia, the West leaders are pushing Russia towards China , Cenral Asia and India...
You have to realise that without Russia , your wars i Iraq and Afganistan especially are doomed.
By the way ,those wars which have been launched since 2003 under false grounds only to secure energy (oil and gas reserves)
are costing hundreds of thousands of lives of local citizens and financially are costing more than World War 2.
I think that he main problem that current irresonsible politicians are lack of strategic vission and are immune from punishment !
This mast be changed !

Gruzdev, Odesa, Russia

It can be argued that the Nazis erred in their non-aggression pact with the USSR, that if Germany had attacked it from the old Russo-Polish border, rather than the resultant further-West one, they might have reached Moscow in force before a ferocious winter allowed the Russians time to recuperate. Much the same is true of Napoleon's 1812 invasion.

Consequently, and correctly, Russia regards distance as its prime defence, which renders its concern at NATO's eastward expansion understandable and indeed justifiable. As for this being purely defensive . . . 'capabilities take years to build; intentions can change in - literally - a heartbeat'.

We are in the wrong. Stop!

Noel Falconer, Couiza, France

mate

this article is worth reading.but i dont agree with authors opinion


russia with the single push of a button can wipe out poland and Czechoslovakia and all the US radars and whatever american might intall. but russia woudlnt do that!

cold war is over russia its just paranoid! it thinks i can scare ukraine and georgia by any means...??? ukraine is independent and let the gov decide.not people cause people still have USSR mentality.....west is bad eveyrthing associated with west is bad they sya

so let the gov decide....not russia! if Ukrainian gov says no it means no .if it says yes russia shouldnt pressure ukraine not to! UKRAINE AND GEORGIA are better off with NATO but not with russia for sure!

sami, Sydney Mate, AUS

NATO expansion with the aim to encircle Russia is similar if "USSR and Estern Block" of disbanded block called "Warsaw Treaty" would expanded into Canada, Mexica,Cuba, Norway,Sweden,Iceland and Ireland,Argenitana,Brasil ....
What U.S. reactio would be then ?
Do not forget that "cuban crisis" onnly had started as answer to USA decission to deploy missiles with nuclear warheads
in Turkey and Germany...
Ian Clarke, don't you know that U.S. has twice more nuclear weapon than Russia ?!
Don't you know that in last 50 years U.S. has started 40 military conflicts worldwide ?
Don't you know, that he` war i Iraq has started to secure Iraq's enrgy oil and gas resources ?!!!
Hypocrisy and selfishness of political
leaders in US and EU is quite obvious and is very dangerous to security and stability, because TRUST is being abused by those political leaders.

Ivanov, Sochi, Russia

To Ian Campbell, Truro, UK.
Why do you use verbs like "Russia must", "Russia will have to"? Do we owe you personally or owe the UK? I wounder if you could possibly let us do what we want, "master"?

Denis, Moscow, Russia

NATO was created after World War 2 to contain Soviet expansion, a valid reason at the time. The Soviets had taken over Eastern Europe and posed a serious threat to Western Europe, particularly France and Italy with their large communist parties.
The Soviet Union no longer exists, and Russia, having ceded all of Eastern Europe as well as the non-Russian former Soviet republics, is no longer a threat.
So what is NATO's reason for being now? Does it have a new raison d'etre? If not, why does it exist at all?

David Smith, Edison, USA

Lest anyone forget, whilst NATO was formed in response to Russian refusal withdraw after invading Nazi Germany, we didn't leave withdraw either. We (UK, US and France) continued to occupy Germany, yet only France and Russia suffered invasion and Russia suffered more damage than France ever did at the hands of the Nazis. France and the rest of Western Europe may have been invaded and occupied, but the Nazis (West Europeans from Russia's viewpoint) tried to destroy Russia completely. And the target was "Slavs" not "Soviets", so Russia was, arguably, subjected to genocide
Instead of talking Russia out of this continued occupation, we formed a military alliance against them in 1949. In the late 1950's we (NATO) started a nuclear arms race. As far as Russian people are concerned, NATO or Nazi, it's a military force designed and emplaced specifically to confront their country and influence their politics and freedom of action. Why wouldn't they see this as a threat?

KR, Stockport,

Remember that the most clearly defined borders that Russia has are in the west and that Russia has throughout its history feared encirclement and invasion, largeley owing to its gepgraphy. The fact that it had nuclear missiles when the Soviet Union collapsed and had been the clear opponent to Nato during the cold war precluded its inclusion in Nato - you don't bait a bear and then open your front door to it. Russia needs to retain its nuclear deterrent but more from an asian perspective. If politics is demographics, the Chinese border is where things will kick off and Russia can't afford to look weak before the chinese, who act with far less restraint concerning political expediency. The population disparity on the eastern borders is unsettling and Russia needs to retain influence in The West as well. Nato's expansion functioned a vital stabilising force in giving reassurance to former eastern euopean states who suffered under Soviet occupation. Ukrain and Georgia were Soviet.

John, Knutsford, UK

Impoverished , threatened and swindled by the current Regime Georgian population have been told that by joining NATO, living standards will be imporved, jobs will created, financial assistance will be given ....
Georgia- Country with 4 million population has the THIRD LARGEST ARMY IN IRAQ (more than 2000 army soldjers), and now it's autocratic young RULER, supported by U.S. is sending another 2000 in Afganistan.
In Ukraine, 60% of ukraininan polupalation have not supported the idea of several political rulers (again backed by US administration) to join NATO.
100% did not support war in Iraq !
I think current politicians who have become "new political class" are lack of honesty ,integrity, common sence and knowldge; all of them are too selfish.

Ivanov, Sochi, Russia

There is a very simple resolution to this situation. If the nations would like to join, and the international body would like these nations to join (NATO in this case), let them join. It seems like that should be the end of the conversation. If this upsets the Russians, perhaps the question should be asked…Why do these states feel the need to join? After all, if Russia was such a benevolent neighbor, why is it that the nation-states next to Russia scrambling for some sort of defensive agreement with the nations further west. The only thing G.W. Bush can do is advocate for the acceptance of these countries into NATO; he cannot make them want to join.

Chris Anderson, Naples, Florida

The Bolsheviks no longer control Russia - Russia is now controlled by rational Slavs intent on their own prosperity. The irrational internationalists intent on world domination have now re-emerged as Neoconservatives in the US; the country and the badge has changed, but their pedigree can be traced directly to left wing intellectuals from Eurasia. They have ridden roughshod over the greatest template for a free democracy, the Constitution of the United States of America.
It is the Neoconservatives who threaten world peace and Russia is fully aware of that.

John, London, UK

Since when did it become correct grammar to use 'Nato', rather than the correct abbreviation - 'NATO'? It stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. Do we write 'Usa', 'Un', 'Gb', 'Osce'? No we don't. While I applaude contributors who have use the correct version in the comments, I am very disappointed that the Times of all papers uses incorrect English grammar. What has happened to editorial standards?

David L, Brussels,

"Paris is worth a mass" as the man said. Clearly Germany does not think that Nato is worth any risk to the security of its gas supplies.
Russia 1 Germany 0 (own goal)

Stephen Green, Correns, France

It's all about oil, and Russia has so much of it.

bob , montreal,

There's two sides to this coin:
(a) Russia, with its 5000 nuclear warheads, is better placed than any extremist islamic regime or other tangible military force to destroy the democratic freedom the west enoys. With the push of a button, they could trigger a world war in greater scale than anything our civilisation could endure.
(b) If the west were in Russia's position, encircled by a powerful, united military force, they would be echoing the same concerns.

SOLUTION: Russia you don't need all those nuclear weapons - get rid of them and we can get rid of NATO.

Ian Clarke, London, UK

This article is a good example of special pleading. Russia must one day, and soon, show that it has really ditched its Soviet past, which it clearly has not. Yes there are inconsistencies in the selection of candidates for NATO and who gets a referendum, but the bottom line is that we in the west fundamentally do not trust Russia under Putin/Medvev not to return to its really ugly authoritarian and thus likely expansionist ways. By sucking the ex-satellites into NATO it keeps strategic pressure on Moscow who will one day have to cease playing the nationalist cards it does at this time and concentrate on true freedom and liberal democracy - the ultimate and only guarantee against the sort of past that we fear can rise again, until that is the case.

Ian Campbell, Truro, UK

Ukraine wants to join NATO?
Not true. democratic politicians want. But population does not. Currently, at a nationwide vote (one is required to join NATO), 22% of population would vote pro and 54% would vote against, accroding to a poll based on 5000 respondents. Current Ukrainian govt only hopes to advertise the idea of NATO in the next 6 month and reverse the numbers. Not likely. Ukraine was part of USSR, was the one country most badly damages by WWII in terms of the percent of population perished, and the population really does distrust NATO.
Cheers.

Andriy, Kyiv, Ukraine

Pro-NATO guys. I wonder how everybody is missing the point about Ukraine. It's not like Ukrainians are keen on joining NATO. Recent polls clearly show that 46% of Ukrainians are against this alliance. In particular, Russian population of Ukraine (often referred to as 'russian minority', which is for a second, 15 millions of 50 million country population) will just never accept this. Even more, most of them will support re-uniting with Russia.

If Ukraine will join NATO it will most probably just finally split populatoin of the country on two almost equal parts and may end up in civil disorders or Kosovo-style conflict, but with a small difference: each side will have about 25 millions of people and solid support - NATO on Westerners' side and Russia on the other.

So what I want to say: many are supporting NATO enlargement based on a wrong supposition that 'Ukraine and Georgia are bullied by Russia and need protection'. It is not that simple. In fact, it is never that simple.

Alexey, London, UK

Nice to hear someone openly admitting that it is, actually, all about Russia. Although not sure I agree with the last paragraph - surely it's because Russia is neither weak nor irrelevant that adding Ukraine and Georgia to NATO is seen as desirable? And it is the perception of a very real Russian threat that makes eastern Europeans so enthusiastic about NATO's expansion in the region. Another sign of Russia's potency is that only Germany felt able openly to oppose the expansion plans before the others.

Chris Dickson, Brussels, Belgium

I am a Brit living in West Ukraine, and here the nationalists for sure want to join NATO as it is anti-Russian, and they would love to score petty points against Russia and their own ethnic Russian citizens. Although I can fully understand these sentiments, joining NATO at this time will only serve to fuel this internal conflict, especially as the author rightly points out, Crimea was a Russian territory until the 50's. Russia needs to be allowed time to grieve properly for its ex-emperial grandeur and not to be provoked. As a Brit I fully understand this - some of us are still hankering for our Empire almost a century later, the Russians are less then 20 years into this process. At the moment Russia has a truck load of petro-dollars to spend and Ukraine would be better served by ramping up production and helping to relieve them of this wealth burden. For sure those of us who live in central Europe don't need more nukes in Europe, pointing at Europe!

simon, L'viv, Ukraine

I suppose another question that interests me is whether this expansion of NATO actually works - if Ukraine joins and Russia invades it at some point in the future would the rest of NATO really come to its defence - totally different scenario for politicians to defending Poland that borders Western Europe.

John, London,

my taxes spent on peying for their mistakes. Why don't we just invite Russia to join NATO? Wouldn't be that a perfect solution to so many problems? But no, when Putin said that he does not exclude this option back in 2000, we hastened to say NO to him and give him yet another proof that we're building an alliance against his country. By accepting the non-democratic Ukrain and Georgia into the Alliance we'll totally alienate the potential partner who has been helping with Afghanistan and in other actions, and face the consequences.

Nate, Omaha, Nebraska

One look on a globe at Russia will give a much clearer idea of why Russians fear encirclement. However, I feel that Anatole Kaletsky is mixing Putinist populism based on a high oil price with something much older in the Russian psyche, which feared encirclement, and missing a key point.
Russia's population largely lives in Europe, with about a third living in Asia in a very empty space. Historic threats have indeed come from the west (Napoleon, Hitler and their Cold War defeat), but Russia would do better to look east and worry about China, which must harbour ambitions towards Asia, and to the south where Islamic fundamentalism has already led to a defeat in Afghanistan. Scotch whisky, Mercedes cars and Marlboro cigarettes are far less dangerous than another Ghengis Khan.

Dave, Slough,

Think of the following: after the fall of USSR, Russia was the ONLY country from the european part of the USSR which was never considered by the West for NATO or EU membership. Even during so-called 'democratic' Eltzin period. Why? Isn't it because the West always perceived (and continues to percieve) Russia as an enemy? It looks like you guys really need an enemy to consolidate yourself.

Before West and East Germany united, Russia (USSR at that time) was promised by the West (mainly - USA) that NATO will never move further east. What happened after that? Why should we trust the West after that?

There is an excellent website in russian web called inosmi.ru which translates articles about Russia from the world press every day. I recommend those of you who can read russian to visit this site and check out the discussions in the forum. You will see which reactions the anti-russian propaganda campaign (I don't have any other words for it) creates.

Dmitri, Berlin, Germany

Anatole, you have some fantastic points in your article that western politicians and general population fail to understand which relate to the just feelings of the Russians.

However, I think you are mistaken in your last point of making the lack of strength the reason for the actions; in my view Nato is exercising vae victis ('Victors justice').

The Viking, Denmark,

"In Ukraine, Russia (...) allegedly tried to fix elections or even kill politicians on their behalf".

By not refuting these outlandish accusations (which have no shred of evidence in their support), the author has undermined the cogency of his otherwise brilliant article. The thing is that this non-sense (as well as the whole anti-Russian smear campaign in the West) was invented by the neo-con propaganda exactly for justifying Nato's eastern expansion.

Yuri, Moscow,

If there is not going to be a buffer zone between Russia and NATO, will Russia then need to invade a non-NATO country like Finland to secure its territory or even to expand?

maria, london, UK

So, the basic arguement is.

Russia thinks it still owns Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, Ukrane, Georgia ect ect ect.

And we should respect that?

We should ignore the wishes of free and fair democratic nations, because the local bully thinks they are its play things?

Dominic, Manchester, UK

Why don't we just invite Russia to join NATO?

Bry Barnes, Somerset, Uk

'T h e West'? Let's be specific: No other than President Bush is meddling in European affairs by firstly bullying for installation of American rockets on Polish ground (based on the spurious argument the rockets to serve as protection against Iran) and now urging for Ukrainian/Georgian membership in NATO. Mr. Bush knows dawn well that his ideas will not materialize within the time of his reign any more. Nevertheless, he keeps teneciously causing waves in European waters. Europeans are to watch out for Trojan horses.

Rolf Horst Schmitter , Kiev , Ukraine

As a British expat living in Athens I totally agree with Mr Kaletsky's analysis. Why should we Europeans rub Russia's nose in the dirt at a time when we're more dependent on her natural resources than at any time in our history? Instead of alienating her we should be bringing her into Nato-2, ie into a new alliance such as AREA (the Atlantic, Russian and European Alliance). Nato should also focus on Europe not the Middle East. As for Fyrom its vitriolic attacks on Greece prior to this summit were totally unacceptable, eg desecrating the Greek flag with a swastika when Greek AND BRITISH soldiers died protecting the flag. Time to break up this non-state and allow the Albanians of Tetsovo to join their motherland. The rump could then become a city-state called Skopje but never Macedonia since this was a Tito creation which flew in the face of history. Macedonia, as any primary school child will tell you, was the home of Alexander the Great - and he was taught by Aristotle: Hellenes!

Dr David Green, Athens, Greece

Well written, refreshing and clear article which expresses a comon sense approach, "nuclear fission needs new clear vision." which is clearly lacking at the Rumanian Jamboree.

tgw, colchester UK

roger weeks, colchester, UK

Nato expansion to East under the criminal dictatorialship of Bush and his lapdog friend UK IS NOT different from the missiles in Cuba back in the 60s!!!!

Also an idiot can see the similarities!!!

What surprise me is the fact that prevalent opinions that whatever thing Nato do is right and whatever thing to other are wrong!

Is Nato is a defensive gang, wht are we having Nato in war in different countries that DID NOT attack any Nato members!!!

dan, douglas, uk

No former Soviet republics were ever FORCED into the USSR. And when the Union fell, no one was also forced to stay.

Personally I don't care if Ukraine and Georgia join NATO or not. They're sovereign countries and if they think NATO will make them safer from Russia - go for it. But I'm all for moving our defence forces closer to their borders in that case - I want to feel safe, too. You say Russia is big, armed and dangerous. But so is NATO, in my opinion.

"Paranoid" is not the word. "Worried" is. if Russia joined some military alliance that circled the US and EU, I think you'd feel worried too. Wouldn't you? So before you judge us, put yourselves in our shoes.

Elena, Moscow,

Anatoly,

Although I suspect that you hail from Russia, try to think about what will happen to the people of Georgia and Ukraine who are trying to join the ranks of the developed Western Europe? Russia's self centered approach to the situation is typical, joining NATO is not an attempt at growth...of course it must be a unilateral attack from President Bush to conquer Russia! I think that Putin and Medvedev are projecting their own uni-lateralism onto the West, and that this ploy to keep a sphere of interest around Russia is just the same old crap Eastern Europe has been dealing with for the 20th century...
As to Germany and France bowing down to Russia's demands...well that seems like a wonderful solution, show the tyrant just how much power he has. Bow down to his demands! When will we learn that pandering to bullies does NOT solve the problem, and leaves fledgling democracies like Ukraine and Georgia out in the cold...

cara, washington, dc,

The author for whatever reason puts himself in the shoes of the Devils' Advocate. However, the problem is that Devil does not need one. 5000 nuclear war heads aimed mainly at the Western capitals are best defenders of Russia. What a waste of precious time, Mr Kaletski. You are totally wrong in labelling NATO as an empire. Perhaps, you need to read more history books to know that empires are created through wars and conquests. Whereas, NATO is a solely voluntary alliance created through own will of likeminded nations. It is a pity that Mr. Kaletski spent his undeniable wit and eloquance for backing autocratic Russia's position in Bucharest against democratic Ukraine and Georgia.

Kakhi, London, The UK

Russia and Ukraine are in Europe. Finland and Ireland are in Europe. What is the "West"? Is Australia in the "West"?

Dan Berlinski, Geneva, Switzerland

Were the shoe on the other foot, NATO and the EU would be a lot less rational then the Russians are being about missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic. Let the United States remember Cuba in 1962 and Nicaragua in the 70s. Kosovo, Poland, the Czech Republic and now the Ukraine and Georgia. The pattern seems pretty clear to me.

Martin Gray, Miami, USA/Florida

You got something right for once.

Robert, Boston, MA

Agreed. Russia will certainly bully those 2 countries even more now to show that it is not afraid.
The NATO isnt stupid, they arent going to start a war. No matter how many missile defences they have, Russia can bomb all nato countries at the same time with nuclear warheads and then, bomb them some more with other biochemical weapons. If a war should start, all sattelites are going to be targets, the internet is going to fall. Russia may be weak, but to declare war against it would be a BIG MISTAKE, this was twice proven By Hitler and Napoleon.

Adrian, Mississauga , Canada

So the writer admits that Russia has done Ukraine and Georgia wrong, meddling, fixing elections, and what nots. Oh, that poor Russia so justified in feeling paranoid and threatened, they've been a little naughty and they're no longer the power they used to be. Then the author compares Russia to a pre-war Germany, and suddenly I myself feel a little threatened all the way in Canada. I think that it should be Ukraine and Georgia who should feel threatened if they DON'T join NATO. It is too bad that France and Germany have sold them for the price of Russian gas.

Lida, Toronto, Canada

While your nationalist sentiment is obviously second to none, Colleen, doesn't the fact that the question of Ukraine and Georgia's accession to NATO is still up in the air give lie to your claim that NATO is an American proxy? I wouldn't say that Germany and France are on Russia's side either - they're afraid of making Russia angry. Threats and friendship tend to be mutually exclusive in my experience. If Putin weren't ranting about "grave consequences" in the Duma I'm sure France and Germany wouldn't care (I don't think Italy cares in either case). The US isn't the one being appeased here, Russia is, and for no good reason.

Matt, Chicago, IL

Nice argument, but what about Ukraine? Sure, Russia may feel threatened by the enlargement of Nato, but that slightly overlooks the heavy handed Russian in Ukraine's electoral process, or recent tensions over oil and gas. Does Russian paranoia somehow over-ride the rights and interests of Ukranians, who certainly welcomed the move? Nor should we forget that Moscow recently sponsored the assassination of a British citizen on British soil, or that Russia are currently involved in a little act of ethnic cleansing in Chechenya - this is not a pleasant country, ruled by reasonable and nice people. It is a savage militant state that regularly threatens its neighbors and developing a strong defense against its aggression seems like a good idea.

Mike, London,

I think if NATO is trurly for maintaining peace and security around the world and if the united states is the main military force in the world why has Russia working with NATO or why hasthe united states not doing everything that can be done to have Russia join in with it to create a joint force to fight the war on terror. Why has the United States and NATO have not also asked China to join in also is it that they fear truly fear working with the rest of the world.

David, vail, united states

To be honest, though, I'm not that sympathetic towards Russian concerns. They've been more or less openly secessionistic movements in Ukraine, which smacks heavily of traditional Russian meddling in Ukrainian affairs.

Fundamentally, though, it is the Ukrainians' choice to take an option that preserves their security. They rightly see Russia as a threat to their sovereignty, and it is.

Brett, Salt Lake City, USA

I wish to thank author for this article. I'm happy to learn, that some westerners understand our anxiety about NATO expansion. We don't want to be second Iraq.
NATO expansion is a great support for a anti-west political forces inside Russia - it gives them a good possibility to say "Motherland in danger".
But I don't need to say more - this article explains situation very well.

Sergey Hudiev, Moscow, Russia

NATO - a defensive alliance? Tell that to the Serbs who were bombed by NATO and have now had a chunk of their country stolen from them by separatists aided and encouraged by the main NATO powers.

Andrew, Toronto,

Russia lost 27 million people or so freeing Europe from fascism and dictat 60 years ago and it could do it again if called upon today, but why should do it?
colleen, brooklyn, usa / ny
Colleen, ask the Poles, Czechs and Latvians if they were freed from dictat by Russia! They were free when the Russians left, and they want to stay that way , which is why, as Mr. Kaletsky says, they were so desperate to join NATO. Putins words and actions in the past few years do nothing to suggest thay they are wrong.

Ian Bannen, Oxford, UK

It's a clear and well written article. Expansion is provocative and gives more cons than pros. It also pushes Russia to be closer to China, and I don't think it can be in interest of NATO countries after all.

Vlad, Los Altos, USA/California

It is interesting to follow the author’s circular logic. He states that Russia’s paranoia of encirclement is legitimate, because the neighboring NATO aspirant states have a decidedly anti-Russian stance. He even clearly describes the reason for this anti-Russian sentiment. “..Ukraine and Georgia are justified in being hostile because Russia has been meddling in their politics..” Therefore, the Russia’s paranoia stems from its neighbors understandable response to Russia’s own provocative and disruptive actions

It seems like there should be a simple answer to this. If Russia stops meddling in sovereign countries affairs, the anti-Russian sentiment might decrease in those countries. In fact entire motivation to join NATO might even disappear. Ukraine and Georgia have lot more in common with Russia historically and culturally, than with US. Isn’t it intriguing for Russian politicians why these countries go to such length to align themselves with a distant and culturally different country?

Malhaz Jibladze, Austin, Texas, USA

Anatole Kaletsky is absolutely right that the current policy of encircling Russia is very short sighted and provocative.

nick, London,

Bravo! Hits the nail on the head! Invite Russia in or let her have her sphere of influence, and let Ukraine and Georgia, and whoever else that is supposedly more democratic and free, exert a positive influence back onto Russia—but in a non-threatening way. Being non-threatening, and extending the carrot rather than using the stick all the time, is the best way not "to lose" Russia. There is a Buddhist saying: "At the bottom of everything, people just want to be understood and appreciated."

PF Wolkonsky, Albany, New York USA

Russia may even go as far as to furtively provoke military conflicts in those break-away countries ignoring NATO's provisions if Ukraine and Georgia are accepted!

Don Askarov, Clifton, New Jersey, USA

The world does respect Russia I believe. The country has great traditions, brilliant people, and west should embrace Russia more.

President Putin needs to be congratulated for the fantastic work he's done over the last few years. What a job he's done to get the country to where it is after the Soviet days. I believe he deserves a lot more credit.

The West's view of democracy is not the best for all, and look to Iraq, and other western distasters since WWII for evidence. Russia , in it's own time, will be a model nation, and they should be our friends.

The West would do well to take respect, and work with Russia, and if anything in this uncertain world will bring some stability. I believe Europe, and UK should make a strart without delay to mean any mistrust, and misunderstanding.

If Russia planned to build such a missle system close to other nations boarders would we not be upset? There must be other solutions that can be worked out.

Pete, Farnborough,

Has it occurred to anyone that Ukraine, Georgia, and other former Soviet Republics want to be free and not bullied by Russia. If they want to join an alliance that stands for freedom then let them be. Russia has no reason to be paranoid...if the U.S wanted Russian soil it would have already taken it. Wake up world...let's be united, not divided.

Jeff Winchell, San Antonio, Texas

I note that this writer is attempting to state Russia's concerns about the eastward expansion of the EU and NATO. These sound legitimate however perhaps it might be more useful to see the situation from the point of view of the nations who want to join NATO. All seem to have been occupied by Russia or it's later Soviet descendent and have only just regained their independence. They want to stay independent and the obvious way to do this is to have a big friend who actually frightens the Russians.

NATO and the EU are not whom the Russians should be concerned about. It would be more productive for them to look south to China which is once again beginning to flex it's muscles. Russia is the largest country in the world but has a population of only 142 million. China has a population of over 1 billion and has a growing economy looking for resources. Common sense seems to say that the Russians are looking the wrong way.

John Corkery, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Russia is isolating itself and Nato next to Eu is doing it`s best to isolate Russia.. Who is still beleiving in the Word of USA ? NATO or EU? after the Story of Weapons of Massdestruction in Iraq? Deploying Rocket`s in Poland to protect the Western World against Air Strikes from Iran??? Sending more troops to Afganistan to establish Western Way of Democracy inside MideAge Middle east? Forcing ethnic Serb`s to stay with Albanians inside Kosovo.... ? East Europeans who stayed for Year`s under Occupation and now supporting War`s like Iraq?
i hope Russia stay strong and do not start an New Cold war with West... We Brazilian`s,Russians,Chinese,Indians and South African`s are the comming force in the World. Russians if you read this... dont believe Nato is speaking for the World Opinion.. No it`s not..!! we understand your possition, if NATO would do the same in South America we would act simular.. just maybe a bit smarter ;-),

João, Fortaleza, Brazil

Rehor, you're assuming that NATO would take the place of the Allies in W.W. II, but what if it's the other way around ?

Because if we are to identify the one country in this world that is behaving like Nazi Germany behaved during W.W. II, invading other countries for natural resources and on made up pretenses etc., the country we would identify is the United States of America.

NATO is simply the USA's proxy, when needed.

Russia lost 27 million people or so freeing Europe from fascism and dictat 60 years ago and it could do it again if called upon today, but why should do it?

By stop appeasing the USA on issues like NATO expansion, Russia could avoid confrontation with the USA. This will especially work if significant powers are on Russia's side and that's what we're seeing: Germany, France, Italy, and Spain are among the E.U. states against appeasing the USA once again.

colleen, brooklyn, usa / ny

I'm sure the Russians are fully aware of Mackinder's Heartland Theory dating back to 1904. The West's (NATO's) strategy of isolating Russia can be seen in the light of preventing this theory being put into practice i.e. in preventing a single force from dominating the Heartland. The theory also helps explain the importance of Afghanistan and Iran.

Thomas Connor, Merseyside,

I appreciate the author of this article being very qualified, he extremely precise conveyed my thoughts, and I believe the thoughts of many Russian people who have been nervously commented (in English) NATO-and-Russia related articles last week trying to persuade negatively disposed public that somehow treatment of our country seem to be inaccurately skewed.

Alexey Nazarov, Novosibirsk, Russia

While Taiwan (or more correctly the Republic of China) is not a member of the the North Atlantic Treaty Organization it is never the less a close ally of the US which makes it crystal clear it will defend Taiwan (or more specifically the islands of Taiwan and Pescadores but not necessarily Kinmen or Matsu) in case of a possible communist invasion.

Now however as for the question why should the West protect Georgia and Ukraine from Russia, the answer is becouse once the rulers of Russia decide to reconquer the neighboring lands they might also wish to aquire new ones and then it will be much harder to stop them.

Ironic how the article ends comparing modern Russian to interwar Germany. I'll quote what a certin British PM said during that period:
"...the settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace". Didn't work out quite as well.

Rehor Pasak, Ostrava, Czech Republic