Timeline for What is the public evidence about Russian claims concerning US promising non-expansion of NATO towards it borders?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2023 at 19:36 | comment | added | convert | @bharring But that sounds like whataboutism. Russia broke it promise, so it gives NATO to do the same, but even if we stay in this paradigm NATO broke its promise first. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 19:33 | comment | added | bharring | @convert Joe W brought it up to impeach either the credibility of Russia diplomatically, or impeach the good-faith of Russia in respecting treaties of which major parts of NATO were party to. Either arguing that Russia is untrustworthy, or their betrayal of Ukraine, US, UK, and others changes things. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 19:25 | comment | added | convert | @bharring But how is this related to the question and my answer specially? | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 19:22 | comment | added | bharring | No, I'm saying that "Russia agreed as party of a treaty they singed for turning over nuclear weapons" was a statement about Russia's commitment to honor Ukraine's borders in exchange for Ukraine giving their nuclear weapons to Russia. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 18:58 | comment | added | convert | @bharring Are you saing that promis to not extend NATO is conected in any way with Budapest Memorandum. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 18:45 | comment | added | bharring | In "for turning over" he's saying the turning over of nukes was the consideration. If Bob agrees with Alice to do X for Y, it's a quid pro qo of Bob promising X in exchange for Alice promising Y. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 13:32 | comment | added | Joe W | @convert what are you talking about? I never said that Russia was turning over nuclear weapons. It was Ukraine who agreed to turn over nuclear weapons in return for security guarantees as well as other things. Ukraine agreed to turn over the weapons to Russia. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 13:26 | comment | added | convert | @Joe W but Budapest Memorandum says nothing about Russia turning over nuclear weapons. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 13:24 | comment | added | convert | @Stančikas But I am specially refering to Document 01, where the possibility of NATO expansion, as well as Central and Eastern European membership in NATO was denied. | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 13:23 | comment | added | Joe W | @convert The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances comprises three substantially identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary, on 5 December 1994, to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The three memoranda were originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.[1] | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 13:16 | comment | added | Stančikas | "We would not extend" in English does not mean something that is definitely decided to happen. "If you disagree, it would be a war" Also, as from the article, "We believe that NATO should not expand the sphere of its activity". We just believe ... this is not a promise of any kind, leave alone "should". | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 13:15 | comment | added | convert | @Joe W "Russia agreed as party of a treaty they singed for turning over nuclear weapons" Which treaty? | |
| Feb 2, 2023 at 12:41 | history | edited | convert | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 190 characters in body
|
| Sep 1, 2022 at 0:14 | comment | added | Joe W | @anm767 And for others it isn't, my point is nothing that I read in that answer indicates an actual promise was made and it is just a snippet of information lacking a lot of details. | |
| Sep 1, 2022 at 0:08 | comment | added | anm767 | @Joe W for some people a handshake is a deal. Some need signed papers. And some hire lawyers to get out of signed deals. All comes down to what kind of person you are. | |
| Aug 31, 2022 at 20:56 | comment | added | convert | @Fizz The original sorce is paiwalled, that´s why I didn´t link to it. | |
| Aug 31, 2022 at 2:18 | comment | added | Joe W | @Allure Not really when it is a small bit of text from a single source that doesn't include any details of what took place in those talks. Just because you say something during talks doesn't mean you are making a promise of doing anything. | |
| Aug 31, 2022 at 1:51 | comment | added | Allure | @JoeW ""We had made it clear during the 2+4 negotiations that we would not extend NATO beyond the Elbe [sic]," said West German diplomat Juergen Hrobog. <--- you don't consider this a promise? | |
| Aug 30, 2022 at 22:02 | comment | added | 264 champagne bottles on ice | @VladimirFГероямслава: actually the Spiegel [article] is also from Feb 2022. The Norton piece claims only Shifrinson wrote about it in 2019. Shifrinson was long committed to the betrayal theory cfr.org/podcasts/… | |
| Aug 30, 2022 at 21:48 | comment | added | 264 champagne bottles on ice | @VladimirFГероямслава: well, Benji Norton may well fall in that category (He also wrote for en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grayzone). But the original piece that convert didn't link to was published (in German) in 2019. And Shifrinson wrote about it at around the same time. | |
| Aug 30, 2022 at 18:41 | comment | added | convert | @Vladimir F Can you give any evidence that "Der Spiegel" is controled by Russia? | |
| Aug 30, 2022 at 18:31 | comment | added | Vladimir F Героям слава | Interesting how these useful reporters publish these documents just days before their feeder prepares to invade another country. | |
| Aug 30, 2022 at 18:02 | comment | added | Joe W | That does not show that a promise was made, just that it was discussed in a meeting. Not to mention that meeting was with the Soviet Union and not Russia. It should also be noted that Russia agreed as party of a treaty they singed for turning over nuclear weapons and it is clear that they broke that agreement. | |
| Aug 30, 2022 at 17:47 | history | edited | convert | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 855 characters in body
|
| Aug 30, 2022 at 17:38 | history | edited | convert | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 260 characters in body
|
| Aug 30, 2022 at 15:37 | comment | added | convert | @Fizz OK going to fix this. Will the picture of that document be useful? | |
| Aug 29, 2022 at 14:19 | history | answered | convert | CC BY-SA 4.0 |