"Deal Fairly With Russia or Else": Pundits Are Puzzled Why NATO Thinks It's Smarter Than Bismark?

22 Декабря 2017 17:05
"Deal Fairly With Russia or Else": Pundits Are Puzzled Why NATO Thinks It's Smarter Than Bismark?

— The biggest geopolitical lie of modern history has recently been discovered. CIA documents have been revealed that literally quote the Western leaders promising Gorbachev that NATO «won't move an inch towards the western borders of the USSR»:

«Secretary of State Baker's famous 'not an inch eastward.' was one of many NATO's promises regarding USSR security during the meeting with Gorbachev on February 9, 1990. That day, James Baker officially announced: 'Washington can guarantee that NATO borders won't move an inch eastward if the USSR can help them with uniting Germany.' They also discussed NATO expansion in the context of Eastern Europe. Several days before the meeting, the UK Secretary for Foreign Affairs said that Russians have to be sure that, say, the Polish government won't join NATO the next day it terminates the Warsaw Pact».


— In this regard, I'd like to point out that no arrangements seem to be working. They don't keep their promises. That's the basic idea of NATO's eastward expansion. Their printed documents don't seem to work either.

In this regard, I'd like to recite a quote ascribed to Bismarck. It's ascribed, he might not have said it, but still the famous: «Do not think that taking advantage of Russia’s weakness will produce permanent dividends. Russians always come for their money. And when they come, do not rely on agreements. They are not worth the paper they are written on. With Russians, play fair or don’t play at all.»

Nikita Isaev, leader of Novaya Rossiya movement: Bismarck lived in the XIX century, right? Russia's economy was booming at that time. Alexander II conducted his effective political and economic reforms. That allowed us to restore what we'd lost during the Crimean War. When Gorchakov was terminating the clauses of the Paris Peace Treaty, we were becoming the strongest state. Now, we're not.

My friends, I'd like to say the following: What does the US want? Remember how Churchill and Stalin were dividing Europe? They took a piece of paper, wrote who gets what, checked it, and Stalin said: «Keep it, it's fine, I trust you.» These were Yalta-Potsdam agreements that structured the world we're living in now. The USA is Churchill and Stalin.

Listen attentively. It's the world we're living in now. After the collapse of the USSR, they tried to squeeze in some new agreements you're now referring to. Some Baker agreements, the Budapest Memorandum, or something else. The US wants to terminate this approach because the US is acting in an exclusively unipolar world. But we can't do this.

I'd like to recite a quote from 1941. On June 14, 1941, our Minister of Foreign Affairs, Molotov said the following: «Only an idiot could think that Germany would attack the USSR.» June 14, 1941. On June 22, 1941, Minister of Foreign Affairs Molotov said: «We do not deserve this.» After Germany ruthlessly attacked the USSR.

What do you want now? What does Russia want? What do Russians want? Do they trust all those papers? It's the same pact with the devil that we once signed. My friends, you're speaking about the economy.

— Is there a pact with the devil?

— There's no pact, just survival of the fittest.

My friends, you keep reciting your mantras about the economy. United Russia, Communist Party, or some others. While our political system remains the same. While there's no balance of political powers and no competitive elections, when there are no such press conferences like the one yesterday, with all delegates and all people applauding the speaker, we won't develop our economy. We'll keep believing them and then crying and saying: «But… but you're expanding NATO borders. But you promised us.» And then, after our country's collapsed we'll be saying that we did not deserve this.

If that's what you want, keep reciting your mantras about the economy. But we should be changing the political system and showing our political will.

— That's quite interesting, Mr. Isaev.

— If it's not done during the elections campaign now, then in two or three years, the US will destroy our country.

— I doubt that applause influence the development of our economy. That's an odd conclusion to draw. It's not about the development of the economy although it's one of the key factors.

— It's about the survival of the fittest that you're so explicitly advocating. It's applicable in certain areas and bears certain results. We'll address the topic shortly.

— Only the fittest will survive in Crimea, only the fittest will survive in Donbass.

Yury Afonin, member of State Duma: Let's remember what was happening back then. Do you really think a written document would have changed anything? No. Gorbachev gave up everything. Speaking about the withdrawal of our troops from Germany. I was in Germany and spoke with those who represented Germany at the negotiations. They were ready to pay our troops billion of marks to build military accommodations. We gave everything up for pennies. Gorbachev did. He didn't only give up our land, but all the countries of the Warsaw Pact as well.

— We don't have a balanced version. Some are saying he's good, the others that he's bad. No consensus.

— We gave up everything! Who keeps their promises? Written or formal. Only the fittest do.

Take the USSR, the Caribbean Crisis of 1962. Did Kennedy and Khrushchev have any written agreements? Nope. We brought the rockets, but the US stopped trying to instigate a coup in Cuba. The fittest?

Our economy… Nikita, don't stray from the economy, it's the backbone. We've got a strong army but export three quarters of our oil. The USSR exported only one quarter primarily to the socialist states. Now, they'll curtail it and it would have a great impact…

— Nobody will curtail anything.

— The basis of any political process and any powerful state is the economy. We must develop our economy. We must fight poverty. We must develop our enterprises. Then, we'll earn respect. Then, we can negotiate with Trump. If we will be strong there would be no need for any papers.

Look at China. Trump's policy before the elections: «We'll be friends with Russia and we'll oppose China.» After being elected, he understands that China is the world's fastest-growing economy and starts negotiating with them. And we get the fighter jets and an attempt to disrupt our victory in Syria.

That's his policy. We need a strong state with a strong economy.

— Mr. Nadezhdin, please comment, and then, we'll continue.

Boris Nadezhdin, Institute of Regional Development and Law: A couple of words about the basics. Promises to Gorbachev differ fundamentally from the agreements during the Caribbean Crisis and Yalta Conference. Both events had signed written documents.

— But the Caribbean one was formal…

— A formal one? There's a telegram signed by Kennedy suggesting this and that. There's a script of the Politburo’s discussion. And there's Khrushchev's telegram. In this case, there are no written documents.

But there is something. There is a table with Gorbachev sitting at it watching his country collapse. They want him to quickly sign it, so they and say: «You know, we probably won't expand».

My friends, grown men know the difference between promising to marry a girl and actually marrying her. Why do you start all this? I'm sure, at some point of your life, you hinted a girl that you'd marry her. And then you didn't. The same thing here.

— Mr. Nadezhdin seems quite experienced.

— Today, you like one girl, tomorrow the other. That's life. That's why it's not a marriage until you register it. The same thing here. There are no agreements.

Источник: Вести

Newsusa это лучшие Новости США
22 Декабря 2017 17:05
Нет комментариев. Ваш будет первым!