And Gorbachev himself, who was the recipient of that alleged promise said that it was intended and understood as only a short term promise applicable only to East Germany, and that subsequent NATO expansion didn't violate any alleged agreement.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/
In any case, under the U.S. Constitution, congressional action is required before any agreement made by a President - much less a Secretary of State - is binding. We knew that, the Soviets knew that, and the fact that the alleged promise wasn't put into a formal written agreement or treaty proves it was only a short term promise not intended to bind subsequent Administrations.
It's the same reason we weren't bound by Clinton's signature on Kyoto, or Obama's signature on the Paris Climate Accords.
Oh shut up. I’m tired of the neocon spin here. I heard ad nauseam here that no promise was ever made in the first place even before you said this, but what WION dug up refuted that. Then others before you here tried to spin it saying it was “temporary” as you are trying but no one is buying it. Nothing on the audio tapes WION reported on shows it was temporary, so Gorby lied.
As for passed written agreements bound by U.S. law with Native American tribes, the U.S. broke them in the past. Do you think Russia knew that?
When you start on here looking for excuses when words means squat in the eyes of countries we need allies in such as Africa, Asia, South America, etc, because they break their word, you aren’t helping America’s standing, and the U.S. is viewed synonymously with NATO.
Instead, people like you foment mistrust with the U.S.
And no doubt you’ll make excuses for NATO when it offensively bombed Libya on Odumba’s behalf on unproven allegations that Gaddafi was going to kill 10k of his own people and when no NATO member was attacked.
And don’t shill for Bush and stop connivingly using weasel words.
Buzz off. I have no time for people not above board like you.