Q: What are your assessments of the NATO Ministers of Defence meeting?

A.Grushko: There have been no surprises. The meeting confirmed that the alliance has opted for a short-sighted policy. We witness a myth-based policy towards Russia aimed at countering the so-called Russian threat through deterrence, which takes shape in the form of military planning and activities.

That’s exactly in this particular context that we assess the decisions to create and deploy four multinational battalions in the Eastern Europe and a brigade under division-level command in Romania. Whatever insignificant NATO officials might call these measures, from a purely military perspective the US and NATO activities should be analyzed as a whole. And the battalions are not the only measures.
In Focus
30 May 2016
Russia Direct: What are the consequences of the first meeting of the Russia-NATO Council after such a long break?
Alexander Grushko: I would not overestimate the results of this meeting and make long-term projections. It was useful to meet and talk – there has not been such a meeting for almost two years. It was a good opportunity to discuss in-depth key problems of European security. So, it is a positive factor as such.
RD: But is it correct to say that, in concrete terms, nothing followed – you met, made statements that no progress was achieved and that’s it?
A.G.: The main problem today is not whether meetings take place or not, but that NATO has suspended all cooperation with Russia. We used to work together on a whole range of projects that strengthened in real terms the security of the countries involved. Today we have no positive agenda and I do not see that NATO would be ready to reconsider its current policy.
30 May 2016
"What we are seeing today in the Baltic states, as a matter of fact, is nothing but attempts towards force development with the hostile policy pursued by NATO in the recent time. I would not say that it is a direct threat for Russia nut, nevertheless, it obviously creates serious risks as we see an absolutely new military reality forming along our border".
"Recently the [NATO] secretary general visited Poland, and during these visits the Polish side was making statements that now Russia knows that an attack against Poland is an attack against NATO, which is completely absurd, as they are discussing the problem that does not exist".
"The policy (of NATO) lives in surrealistic reality, and the most dangerous thing is that it now starts taking shape of military planning and military preparations carried out on territories along our borders".
25 May 2016
"The quality of security in Europe will ultimately depend not only on how we will manage to decrease military tensions between NATO and Russia, but also on how we manage to organize cooperation in the fight against common security threats. Here the situation looks more promising, because pragmatic interests persist and despite all attempts to use organizations like NATO as an instrument to isolate Russia, cooperation on key security challenges is developing in other formats – the Quartet on the Middle East, the International Syria Support Group and the Normandy Format, etc. Countries that take part in such efforts, which are ready to cooperate with the Russian Federation on a truly collective basis, with respect to our legitimate security interests, should probably retune the policy of the organizations, in which they participate – I mean here not only NATO, but also the European Union"
12 May 2016
“Activation” of the US BMD base in Romania should not be considered in isolation, but in conjunction with other actions of the US and NATO that have negative consequences for strategic stability and international security.
In particular, one should take into account the whole complexity of the US efforts to create a global BMD system, including its active and partly mobile European segment. Beside ground-based Aegis Ashore sites the latter also involves sea-based BMD platforms which are now actively trying to “find feet” in sea basins adjacent to Russia.
We can not ignore the strategic interrelationship between the American BMD project and the so called Prompt Global Strike program as well as Washington's aspiration to retain the greatest degree of latitude as regards possible weaponization of space. In addition, the deployment of multifunctional Mk-41 launchers at Aegis Ashore sites, which are capable of launching intermediate-range missiles, gravely undermines the INF Treaty.
Permanent Representative
Alexander V. GRUSHKO
Belgium, Brussels, 1180-Uccle,
Avenue de Fre, 66

32(0)2 372-0359

32(0)2 375-8547