NATO military buildup near Russian borders will undermine the existing system of European security and make the situation less predictable and more tense, Russia’s envoy to NATO said Friday.
“This is a road to nowhere that will undermine the existing system of European security, will make [the situation] less predictable and more tense,” Alexander Grushko said.
Following Russia’s reunification with Crimea last March and the start of an internal armed conflict in Ukraine’s southeast in April, NATO has been boosting its military presence near Russia’s borders, including in the Baltics.
The alliance has accused Russia of sending troops and equipment to Ukraine’s war-torn Donbas region, claims Moscow has repeatedly denied.
On February 5, NATO defense ministers agreed to set up a new high-readiness force dubbed Spearhead Force as part of the NATO Response Force. Altogether, the enhanced Response Force will be increased and count up to around 30,000 troops.
27 February 2015
Mr Bazhanov, ladies and gentlemen,
I am glad once again to visit the “old building by the Moskva River” that is closely associated with my years of study and youth.
Last September we celebrated the 80th anniversary of the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Participants in the event spoke at length about the achievements that the academy can be proud of. It is one of the leading centres of the comprehensive study of international relations and remains on par with MGIMO University, a talent foundry for our ministry on Smolenskaya Square. Numerous upgrading programmes of the Academy remain popular with the Foreign Ministry employees, including the future heads of Russian offices and missions abroad.
International relations are now going through a difficult transitional period. A few days ago, on February 23, the UN Security Council conducted debates on the need to confirm commitment to the goals and principles of the UN Charter with a view to maintaining peace and security: a topical issue. This issue again revealed different approaches to ensuring stability and security in global affairs.
27 February 2015
Question: Can you comment on recent statements by NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe General Philip Breedlove, who said that Russia is using the so-called frozen conflicts to put political pressure on post-Soviet countries?
Alexander Lukashevich: These statements by General Breedlove are clearly in line with the large-scale anti-Russian propaganda campaign aimed to justify NATO’s aggressive policy towards Russia and to provide a reason for the build-up of the bloc’s military capability.
These are absurd statements that have so little in common with reality that they don’t even deserve a special comment.
What has really surprised and alarmed us is that it is the bloc’s military officials who now provide political assessments and make policy statements increasingly often. This makes us wonder who determines NATO’s current development path.
26 February 2015
Russia and Europe need a dialogue which is the only way to understand where we stand and what should be done to build strategic partnerships and regain trust in the Euro-Atlantic area.

Our Western partners declared the Ukrainian crisis a new chapter in the international relations, a new reality. And this happened almost overnight. However, it was not a new chapter, not the root cause, but rather a symptom of this disease in the Euro-Atlantic security arrangements. A common European security project for Europe and Russia has not worked out. Despite many important achievements, after the Cold war we have lost many opportunities to get rid of the dividing lines in Europe. The principles set forth in the Helsinki Final Act have not been translated into legally binding documents.

If you follow the Russian foreign policy for the past 15 years, you will see that there were no major changes. Russia never sought confrontation with Europe, because we believed that Europe without Russia is not Europe, that strong Russia needs strong Europe. We were very consistent in our aspiration to build strategic partnerships in Europe without dividing lines both bilaterally and with the institutions like the EU and NATO. And we worked together honestly, openly and pragmatically in the areas of common interest.
23 February 2015
Thank you, Mr Chairman,
I’d like to begin by expressing gratitude to the Foreign Minister of China, Mr Wang Yi, for organising this open debate. Its agenda is very significant: ahead of the 70th anniversary of the United Nations, it allows us to critically assess international relations and discuss ways to overcome accumulated systemic problems.
The UN Charter, which was the result of the great victory over Nazism, has been and is the cornerstone of the system of international relations. The goals, principles and rules sealed in the charter are a vital source of international law, the basis of the code of conduct on the international stage and the foundation of the ever growing agglomeration of international treaties and agreements. Of course, the UN is not an ideal organisation. But as Dag Hammarskjöld said, “The United Nations was not created in order to bring us to heaven, but in order to save us from hell.”
For the first time, the UN Charter formulated principles for creating an operating mechanism for governing the world by coordinating the positions of the leading nations. In other words, it formulated the key elements of a polycentric world order. For the first four decades since its establishment, the UN operated under conditions of harsh bipolar confrontation. However, the end of the Cold War lifted the objective obstacles to the UN Security Council becoming an effective format for synthesizing the collective will of the international community.
Permanent Representative
Alexander V. GRUSHKO
Belgium, Brussels, 1180-Uccle,
Avenue de Fre, 66

32(0)2 372-0359

32(0)2 375-8547


In Focus