Russia’s Foreign Affairs Ministry summoned United States Ambassador John Sullivan on Thursday, and provided him their official, 10-page response to the U.S.’s position on Russian security concerns. RT’s summary was that the US had “failed to provide a constructive answer” to the “basic elements” of Russia’s proposals. Rather, Washington ignored the “package nature” of their proposals and, instead, had “cherry picked” some “convenient” topics. These they then “twisted” out of shape, to their advantage.
“Our ‘red lines’; our key security interests and Russia’s sovereign right to defend them are still being ignored.” Russia “proposed following the path of settling the unacceptable situation, which keeps developing in the Euro-Atlantic region, comprehensively and for the long term…This implies, first and foremost, creating a stable foundation of the security architecture in the form of an agreement, under which NATO will give up further actions damaging Russia’s security… In the absence of the readiness of the US side to negotiate solid, legally binding guarantees of our security by the US and its allies, Russia will have to react, including via implementation of measures of military-technical nature.”
Further, the persistent disinformation campaign, evidence-free claims of imminent invasions, is simply to “discredit” Russia’s security proposals. Actual de-escalation means getting Ukraine back on the Minsk Accords pathway. Hence, the U.S. and NATO need to cease both sending arms supplies to, and joint drills with, Ukrainian Armed Forces, and pull out Western instructors. It repeated that the U.S. has circumvented the 1990 Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and the 1997 Russia-NATO ‘Founding Act’ on mutual relations, expanding military infrastructure eastward. The U.S.A.’s strong support for “the policy of NATO’s open doors” runs counter to the basic commitments made within the framework of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which is above all an obligation “not to strengthen one’s security at the expense of the security of others…. We urge the US and NATO to return to the implementation of international obligations in the field of maintaining peace and security.”
“In this regard, we draw your attention to the fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed after talks with his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron in Moscow on 7 February that we are open to dialogue and call for ‘thinking about stable and equal conditions of security for all participants in international life.” The Foreign Ministry welcomed American proposals on mutual verification and transparency measures, including inspections of Aegis Ashore in Poland and Romania and relevant facilities in Western Russia—just not as a substitute for, or as a stand-alone separate from, the core security concerns.
TASS concluded their coverage, with a passage linking progress on a permanent security arrangement with an end to the geopolitical containment game: “The measures on strengthening of trust and security within the framework of the 2011 Vienna Document are adequate to the contemporary situation. In order to begin the discussion of its potential update, necessary conditions must be created. And, to that extent, the US and its allies must abandon its policy of containment of Russia, and take concrete practical measures on de-escalation of the military and political situation.”
