Kiselyov is never at a loss for words
When the Soviet Union broke up, Gorbachev was promised that NATO would not extend any further East.
History has shown this to be empty words. In the following clip taken from Russian news (with transcript below) Russia's top anchor tears into the lies and deceit of NATO.
On Tuesday, the US Senate received a law bill about new sanctions against Russia. For supposed interference into the future US Election. The interference is actually a myth, but it's needed to justify the forthcoming sanctions. This is yet another example of how America handles its international relations in general, and with Russia specifically. Unfairly and even treacherously.
That's how it was from the very beginning of Moscow's seemingly renewed relationship with the West that was offered to Washington, as the USSR was crumbling, by the first and last President of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev. He then agreed to the unification of the two Germanies, the East and the West. Moreover, he agreed on the new state to enter the North Atlantic Alliance with just the one condition of not spreading NATO eastwards. "Not by a single inch," as Secretary of State Baker said to Gorbachev.
As soon as Germany reunited and entered NATO, all promises were immediately forgotten, claiming there was never an official written agreement. And words... what words? Who said them? Who heard them? Were there any words at all?
In fact, there were. And the obligations are officially documented on paper. Just before the New Year, the text was published by the National Security Archive in Washington. However, America's large press, such as the New York Times or the Washington Post, didn't take notice of the documents. It's just gainless for them. Since you can't explain NATO expansion to the East by Russia's aggression, and the documented obligations don't look good at all.
The only thing they can say is that the bilateral US-Soviet document was never agreed upon. But even if it were agreed upon, who will honestly believe that the US wouldn't have pulled out of it? Just as they've left the AMB Treaty, and how they broke all documented deadlines for liquidating excess weapons-capable plutonium, how they withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and how they're currently putting under question the nuclear deal with Iran.
For America, there's no such thing as firm obligations. Even if they do promise something, they only respect it while it's situationally advantageous for them. When it's time to break an agreement, then rationale takes over, and reasons are invented for creating new military bases like it was in Syria, or introducing new sanctions, like with Russia now.
And it's quite obvious why North Korea will never give up their nuclear weapons and rockets in exchange for American promises. Because, as our close neighbors would say, America is "such a country".
This post first appeared on Russia Insider
Anyone is free to republish, copy, and redistribute the text in this content (but not the images or videos) in any medium or format, with the right to remix, transform, and build upon it, even commercially, as long as they provide a backlink and credit to Russia Insider. It is not necessary to notify Russia Insider. Licensed Creative Commons