Yes. NATO. An alliance created against a threat which is no more.
Ukraine would disagree.
An alliance which has constantly broken its promises to stop expanding.
This notion is very interesting, and certainly mentioned a lot in Russia, but, well, players of the time have said, there wasn't any such promise made. (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html) NATO challenged this version of history, with a fact sheet on the subject. (http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_109141.htm) And it doesn't make logical sense, how could you expect a country to sign away its rights in perpetuity by a Superpower?
A defensive alliance which has been expanding and invading for the last 24 years.and invading for the last 24 years.
Not so much (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Operations). Sure I understand Russian anger over intervention in Bosnia, and Kosovo, and Afghanistan.
no subject
Ukraine would disagree.
An alliance which has constantly broken its promises to stop expanding.
This notion is very interesting, and certainly mentioned a lot in Russia, but, well, players of the time have said, there wasn't any such promise made. (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html) NATO challenged this version of history, with a fact sheet on the subject. (http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_109141.htm) And it doesn't make logical sense, how could you expect a country to sign away its rights in perpetuity by a Superpower?
A defensive alliance which has been expanding and invading for the last 24 years.and invading for the last 24 years.
Not so much (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Operations). Sure I understand Russian anger over intervention in Bosnia, and Kosovo, and Afghanistan.