Russia Does Not Deny Anyone Right to Security, but Insists on NATO Not Expanding — Putin

TASS ^ | 12/17/25

[marshmallow]

It was publicly stated that there would be no NATO expansion to the east and the West "couldn't care less" about these promises, the Russian leader noted

MOSCOW, December 17. /TASS/. Russia does not deny anyone the right to security, but insists that promises made to it be fulfilled, including on NATO not expanding eastward, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at an expanded meeting of the Defense Ministry’s board.

"I'm not even talking about NATO expansion, although that's obvious. Today, we are told that we have no right to force anyone to resolve their security issues the way we want, nor to deprive them of their rights. We are not depriving anyone of any rights. We are not demanding anything special from anyone," Putin said. He emphasized that Russia "is simply insisting on the fulfillment of the promises made to it." "It was publicly stated that there would be no NATO expansion to the east. And what?" the president asked rhetorically.

Putin added that the West "couldn't care less" about these promises. "One wave of expansion after another!" he exclaimed, emphasizing that Russia is not asking for anything special. "I repeat once again, we insist on the fulfillment of the promises made to us. I think everyone in this room understands that it is one thing to have agreements with the Soviet Union, and quite another to have agreements with modern Russia after the Soviet Union collapsed. They simply ignored all our interests completely. Ultimately, it led to a coup d’etat in Ukraine," the Russian leader emphasized.

[redfreedom]

Does NATO actually make any member more secure? Does NATO expansion closer to Russia make Russia less secure? Is NATO about as effective as the League Of Nations or the UN? Did NATO outlive its usefulness once the Soviet Union collapsed?

I think the best solution for peace is to prosecute the Victoria Nuland’s of the US and Europe, prosecute all those involved in laundromats, reevaluate the actual need for NATO and sign a peace agreement with Russia with new borders where ever the current front lines are. And most importantly try, convict and hang Ukraine’s pecker piano playing little dictator and give the Ukranian people their own government run by decent politicians (if they happen to exist)

[DownInFlames]

They can have security, but it has to be our way. No way brother.

[nwrep]

God Bless Russia.

[Socon-Econ]

Putin is being too nice — he should insist that NATO be CONTRACTED. It’s a menace to freedom-loving, sexually sane Europeans and Americans.

[TexasGator]

“and sign a peace agreement with Russia with new borders where ever the current front lines are”

ROTFLMAO!

Russia has already refused that as it is not in Putin’s mindset to stop his aggression.

[bk1000]

I’ll go one further: get the USA out of NATO and the UN.

[DIRTYSECRET]

Addition by subtraction. Europe spends their 5% of GNP on defense and we get out.

Expansion-you can’t deny a country’s right to freely associate.
We pull out it leads to war as our socialist friends individually cut back and let the others do the heavy lifting-no unity.

Free speech is under attack and the place is being overrun by falal eaters.

[blitz128]

A few more prayer groups and golden idols sent to the front and the refineries and He just might
Gott mit Uns😎

[blitz128]

Pitin talks of promises made and broken 😂

[TexasGator]

“I’ll go one further: get the USA out of NATO and the UN.”

Russia and China second that.

[Cronos]

A note on “It was publicly stated that there would be no NATO expansion to the east. And what?”

No such public statement was made to the Russian federation.

All that was said - to the USSR was that NATO would not be expanded to the former EAST GERMANY in the light of German reunification in 1989. There was nothing about NATO accepting members from the former Soviet bloc as no one even countenanced that happening.

To summarize - declassified documents show verbal assurances to Gorbachev in 1990 about not expanding into former East Germany during unification, no formal treaty or binding promise existed against broader eastward enlargement after the Soviet Union’s 1991 collapse. Former Warsaw Pact countries joined voluntarily for security, not as part of a Western plot.

[nathanbedford]

Does NATO actually make any member more secure?

Clearly, Vladimir Putin thinks so or he would not object to its expansion.

Does NATO expansion closer to Russia make Russia less secure?

In the age of Intercontinental missiles and now hypersonic missiles, and drones the answer is, no. That is, Russia is not less secure relative to other border nations to Russia.

Is NATO about as effective as the League Of Nations or the UN?

NATO has been the most effective multilateral treaty in history.

Did NATO outlive its usefulness once the Soviet Union collapsed?

Obviously not, Putin's invasion of Ukraine and incursions in Western European nations make that clear.

Your comments concerning hanging Zelinski bespeak a stunning inversion of historical reality.

[Semper Vigilantis]

NATO should have gone way with the USSR. Mutual defense pacts are fine - on a one on one basis. This crap of these small countries with big mouths and next to no means of self defense being backed by the USA needs to end. I firmly believe that NATO exists for two reasons - the main one being so US defense contractors can 'sell' weapons to overseas customers 'buying' them with loans backed by the US taxpayers and the second so that said little countries can act tough knowing they have the USA to bail them out (again) while pi$$ing away their budgets on social programs instead of self defense.

[HereInTheHeartland]

“Russia does not deny anyone the right to security, ”

Except for the countries they invade, pillage, and murder.

[Cronos]

I get the frustration with international alliances if you see them as overreaching, but calling NATO a “menace” to freedom-loving folks doesn’t hold up.

NATO is a voluntary defensive pact—countries join (and stay) because they want protection from aggression, like Russia’s actions in Ukraine or Georgia. No one’s forced in, and it doesn’t dictate social policies (that’s more EU territory, and even then, member states handle their own cultural stuff).

Putin pushing for “contraction” is just rehashing Kremlin talking points to weaken rivals; real security comes from dialogue and deterrence, not dismantling alliances that have kept Europe mostly peaceful since 1949.

If anything, recent expansions were driven by neighbors scared of Moscow’s moves, not some grand conspiracy. What’s your main beef with it?

[libh8er]

“ Does NATO actually make any member more secure?‘

Strange how only a non Nato country in Russia’s vicinity gets repeatedly attacked.

[Cronos]

Redfreedom “Does NATO actually make any member more secure? “

Yes, yes it does.

No country that has joined NATO has been invaded by Moscow.

Georgia and Ukraine petitioned to join in 2008 and Germany and France rejected this “for fear of antagonizing Putin”.
6 weeks after their petition to join NATO being rejected, Georgia was invaded by the Russian federation

[Cronos]

Redfreedom “Does NATO expansion closer to Russia make Russia less secure? “

No it does not.

[Cronos]

Redfreedom “ Is NATO about as effective as the League Of Nations or the UN? “

You’re comparing apples with oranges.

NATO is a defensive military alliance.

The league of nations and the un were talking shops for countries