So, I Asked the Russian Ambassador What He Thinks of NATO

The Russian Ambassador to the United States, Sergey Ivanovich Kislyak, spoke at the University of Virginia on Tuesday evening, in an event organized by the Center for Politics, which no doubt has video of the proceedings. Kislyak was once ambassador to Belgium and to NATO.

Kislyak spoke to a packed auditorium and took, I think, well over an hour of questions. He spoke frankly, and the questions he was asked by students, professors, and other participants were polite and for the most part far more intelligent than he would have been asked on, for example, Meet the Press.

He told the audience that Russia had known there were no WMDs in Iraq, and had known that attacking Iraq would bring “great difficulties” to that country. “And look what is happening today,” he said.  He made the same comment about Libya. He spoke of the U.S. and Russia working together to successfully remove chemical weapons from the Syrian government. But he warned against attacking Syria now.

There will be no new Cold War, Kislyak said, but there is now a greater divide in some ways than during the Cold War.  Back then, he said, the U.S. Congress sent delegations over to meet with legislators, and the Supreme Court likewise. Now there is no contact.  It’s easy in the U.S. to be anti-Russian, he said, and hard to defend Russia.  He complained about U.S. economic sanctions against Russia intended to “suffocate” Russian agriculture.

Asked about “annexing” Crimea, Kislyak rejected that characterization, pointed to the armed overthrow of the Ukrainian government, and insisted that Kiev must stop bombing its own people and instead talk about federalism within Ukraine.

There were remarkably few questions put to the ambassador that seemed informed by U.S. television “news.” One was from a politics professor who insisted that Kislyak assign blame to Russia over Ukraine.  Kislyak didn’t.

I always sit in the back, thinking I might leave, but Kislyak was only taking questions from the front. So I moved up and was finally called on for the last question of the evening.  For an hour and a half, Kislyak had addressed war and peace and Russian-U.S. relations, but he’d never blamed the U.S. for anything in Ukraine any more than Russia.  No one had uttered the word “NATO.”

So I pointed out the upcoming NATO protests. I recalled the history of Russia being told that NATO would not expand eastward. I asked Kislyak whether NATO ought to be disbanded.

The ambassador said that he had been the first Russian to “present his credentials” to NATO, and that he had “overestimated” NATO’s ability to work with Russia. He’d been disappointed by NATO actions in Serbia, he said, and Libya, by the expansion eastward, by NATO pressure on Ukraine and Poland, and by the pretense that Russia might be about to attack Poland.

“We were promised,” Kislyak said, that NATO would not expand eastward at all upon the reunification of Germany. “And now look.” NATO has declared that Ukraine and Georgia will join NATO, Kislyak pointed out, and NATO says this even while a majority of the people in Ukraine say they’re opposed.

The ambassador used the word “disappointed” a few times.

“We’ll have to take measures to assure our defense,” he said, “but we would have preferred to build on a situation with decreased presence and decreased readiness.”

Wouldn’t we all.

Join the campaign to shut down NATO.

Sign a petition for an independent investigation into the airplane crash in Ukraine.

Send a note to the Russian Embassy to let them know you’re against a new Cold War too.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Jim G

    The people of Europe are going to have to get rid of NATO. The US won’t give up control of Europe because a few “radicals” want them to. I think the Europeans recognize now that in giving their security policy over to NATO, they lose their own sovereignty, their own ability to determine the actions of their own governments. I think the sanctions game, which is further ruining the economies of Europe, is the best indicator of the results of NATO. It seems intentional on the part of the US that Europe pay for US policy, and it is further undercutting the already depressed EU economy. And with LaFarge rising in England, and Marine LePenn in France, the voters in Europe seem to want to take back control. The EU Commission has also been involved in the Ukraine Crisis. The EU is the other cause of the loss of sovereignty, and seems to be causing much difficulty in balancing the needs of different economies the EU. Perhaps the EU will also fall apart. And of course we have lost our sovereignty over our government to the ruling elite as you showed in your most recent article. Everything is a mess, and most are blind. Europe is most likely to deal with NATO, the US voters with “Homeland Security (the militarization of our police), and the domination of insiders determining economic and military policy here. Perhaps the clearest path to change is a full investigation of the tragedy they initiated these problems.

  • Party Like 1999

    NATO has fewer days left than everyone realizes.

    Obama is giving NATO the Cloward Piven treatment.

  • MCB

    Get rid of NATO and let the Europeans form their own militaries and defend their own national interests and sovereignty. Of course our government gladly pays the price for their defense in the spirit of imperialism and “AmeriKan Exceptionalism. Let them eat cake…