Is Vladimir Putin Right? ----- Vladimir Putin insists that the West cheated Russia by expanding NATO eastward following the end of the Cold War. Is there anything to his claims? The short answer: It's complicated.

In September 1993, Russian President Boris Yeltsin wrote a long letter to U.S. President Bill Clinton. The letter, addressed to "Dear Bill," began with a mention of the two leaders’ "candid exchange of opinions." And then Yeltsin let loose.

Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic were interested in joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which was a source of concern to the Russian president. Of course, Yeltsin noted, every country can decide for itself what alliance it would like to be a part of. But the Russian public, he continued, saw the eastern expansion of NATO as "as a sort of neo-isolation" of Russia, a factor, he insisted, that must be taken into account. Yeltsin also made a reference to the Two Plus Four Treaty pertaining to Germany’s reunification in 1990. "The spirit of the treaty," he wrote, "precludes the option of expanding the NATO zone into the East."

That letter marked the first time that Russia had accused the West of having broken its word. And despite the fact that the Americans rejected the accusation, a resolution to the conflict has never been found – a situation which has had far-reaching consequences stretching to the present-day. There is essentially no other historical issue that has poisoned relations between Moscow and the West as much in the last three decades as the disagreement over what, precisely, was agreed to in 1990.

In the years since Yeltsin sent his letter, NATO has accepted 14 countries in Eastern and Southeastern Europe into the alliance. And the Kremlin has complained of having been duped every step of the way. Just recently, current Russian President Vladimir Putin complained: "You cheated us shamelessly."

" The Soviet Union put missiles in Cuba, and we totally freaked out. NATO tries to expand into Ukraine, Russia freaks out and we think they are over-reacting? This is a double standard. The western powers are causing the problem here. "

No, this is too much like the liberal argument that since Israel and the and has nukes then so should Iran etc. Unlike Putin, the US has not sought to conquer and take away countries independence for perhaps about 100 years, but has spend billions fighting proxy wars against Soviets and now Putin (Iran, Syria) and in aid to such countries as Iraq and Afghanistan and in alliance building (and US reached $637 million to Ukraine in 2020) against Russia (yet, despite sanctions, Russia receives an average of $274,780,483 in foreign aid from the US per year, and once one of the biggest recipients of US foreign aid, receiving around $1.5 billion annually from 2005 to 2008m much for disarmament, plus $163,725,255 to Georgia; $124,103,154 to Turkey; and Bosnia and Herzegovina receives an average of $58,567,551) whereas the Soviet Union sought to conquer and take away countries independence (even as by puppetry) by nature, and Putin longs for that glory, and in Russia even outlaws any evangelism by any means except by his state church.

Meaning without the threat of US intervention Russia would expand to capture NATO countries and more, while without the threat of Russia and China the US would need only be taking action against militaristic Islam, and significantly reduce its military spending, which it did after the fall of the Soviet Union.

However, that does not mean the US military would not look for practice, and it seems to me the exclusion of Russia in the Kosovo intervention as well as the expansion of NATO - which meant more US money*- when Russia was weak was not wise, and has provided a pretext for Putin's push into the West, including parts of South America. As was that Democracy was automatically going to work for corrupt atheistic and institutionalized religion Russia. Only when Russia under Putin began to seek to become a military threat could NATO expansion be justified, which I believe Putin would have done anyway. And to counter Putin's complain of the West expanding NATO when Russia was weak, it can point to the Soviets history (the demise of which Putin laments) and his constant chest-thumping and aid to Iran etc and alliance with China and military threat to Ukraine as justification NATO.

Only the naive would believe Communism as well as Putin does not seek oppressive world dominion by military coercion, even if the subjects were like the Amish (even more so). *a1997 Pentagon set the range [of NATO expansion] as between $27 billion and $35 billion over 10years; a 1996 RAND Corporation study, $17 billion to $82 billion; a USCongressional Budget Office (CBO) study, $21 billion to $125 billion (http://comw.org/pda/nato699.html)

List by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
2022 Fact Sheet (for 2021)^[1]
SIPRI Military Expenditure Database^[5]

List by the International Institute for Strategic Studies
Top 15 Defence Budgets 2021^[6]

Rank	Country	Spending (US$ bn)	% of GDP	% of Global Spending

Military expenditure, share of GDP

List by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
2022 Fact Sheet (for 2021)^[1]
SIPRI Military Expenditure Database^[5]

Russian and Chinese military spending are actually far higher than the chart due to captive markets and Purchasing Price Parity in those countries.[3][4]

Rank	Country	Spending (US$ bn)	% of GDP	% of Global Spending
06	Saudi Arabia^[a]^[b]	57.5	8.4	2.9%
14	Israel	21.7	5.6	1.1%
04	Russia	61.7	4.3	3.1%
01	United States	778.0	3.7	39%
03	India	72.9	2.9	3.7%
10	South Korea	45.7	2.8	2.3%
05	United Kingdom	59.2	2.7	3.0%
	World total	1,981	2.4	100%
08	France	52.7	2.1	2.7%
12	Australia	27.5	2.1	1.4%
02	China^[a]	252.0	1.7	13%
11	Italy	28.9	1.6	1.5%
07	Germany	52.8	1.4	2.7%
13	Canada	22.8	1.4	1.1%
15	Brazil	19.7	1.4	1.0%
09	Japan	49.1	1.0	2.5%

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.