Block reflection: the Russian Foreign Ministry stated that NATO was not ready for dialogue

Today, there is no basis for a conversation between Moscow and the North Atlantic Alliance. In particular, the restoration of the Russia–NATO Council is excluded in the foreseeable future, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko told Izvestia. With its policy, the bloc proves that it needs a big opponent to justify the increase in military spending. At the same time, Moscow stops all threats from him. According to the diplomat, the Russian Federation has been able to reach a military level that allows it to respond to any challenge, taking into account the interests of economic development and without prejudice to its growth rate. On June 24-25, The Hague will host the NATO summit, which will discuss the increase in military spending to 5% of GDP, the Ukrainian crisis and the future expansion of the alliance. However, there is no consensus on these issues.

Will Russia and NATO restore dialogue

Russia sees no desire on the part of NATO countries to strengthen their security through the formation of normal relations with Russia, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko told Izvestia.

"They have set a course to prevent victory in the Ukrainian theater, and they continue to follow this course," the diplomat stressed.

According to him, what is happening in NATO is not a momentary change in the political situation, but a fundamental one. This hostile course is being implemented not only in rhetoric, but also in policy and strategic documents, the diplomat stressed.

— Russia has become the main threat to NATO because Brussels decided that NATO cannot exist without a big enemy. In general, the history of NATO is a story of proving one's own worth. When the process of European security began to gain momentum based on security through cooperation, arms control, and restraint in defense construction, it turned out that NATO was not particularly needed. Therefore, the process of expanding the alliance was launched in order to confirm that NATO exists. This process is the formation of new dividing lines and the search for an enemy," Alexander Grushko clarified in an interview with Izvestia.

Against this background, the restoration of the Russia–NATO Council is excluded in the foreseeable future, he continued. According to him, this structure was created on the understanding, which was recorded in the relevant documents that "the world has changed and we do not consider each other as an enemy, that there are common threats, and these common threats require joint actions." Therefore, a political dialogue was needed, through which assessments of these threats were exchanged, the diplomat stressed.

— If necessary, decisions were made about whether we were acting together or in some kind of coordination, or whether someone could not act, but at the same time understand the actions of the other. All this was based on the fact that the norms of international law would be respected. But this is now a thing of the past, and there is no basis for conversation today," says the Deputy Russian Foreign Minister.

There are few prospects for restoring the work of the Russia–NATO Council, and the military-political bloc turned out to be incapable of dialogue, said Ivan Loshkarev, associate professor of Political Theory at MGIMO, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. Initially, the Council's idea was to show a balance in the alliance's policy — against the background of expansion in Eastern Europe, it established an equal dialogue with Russia on the entire spectrum of security issues.

— Until 2013, this body worked on very important issues, from assistance to Afghanistan to emergency response. The Council had a dense structure of advisory mechanisms — several dozen different bodies. All this contributed, if not to understanding, then to relieving some of the tension in relations between Russia and NATO," the expert said.

However, some Western elites still understand the need for dialogue with Russia. For example, in May, the United States made a proposal to restore the work of the Russia–NATO Council, Bloomberg reported. According to him, it is proposed to do this to resolve the conflict in Ukraine.

The bilateral channels of communication between Russia and NATO, which operated for two decades after the end of the cold War, have now been virtually eliminated. Nevertheless, if necessary, the alliance can contact Moscow through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Ministry of Defense. Russia also has the opportunity to contact NATO, for example, through the embassy in Belgium or through American contractors with whom a dialogue on Ukraine is underway today, Tigran Meloyan, an analyst at the HSE Center for Mediterranean Studies, told Izvestia.

Increased defense spending in NATO

The next NATO summit will be held on June 24-25 in The Hague. The meeting of the leaders of the North Atlantic Alliance will focus on increasing military spending and continuing support for Ukraine.

At the same time, there is no unity in NATO on the issue of increasing military spending. Earlier, Donald Trump demanded to raise their target from 2% to 5% of GDP. Secretary General Mark Rutte proposed a compromise: 3.5% for defense and another 1.5% of GDP for infrastructure and military—industrial complex development. However, even the current figure of 2% of GDP was reached by 2024 by only 22 of the 32 NATO countries. Few people want to increase spending further, mainly the Baltic States and Poland. For example, this request has already allegedly been rejected by the Spanish government, RTVE TV and radio company reports.

Earlier, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban called the proposal to increase defense spending "murderous for Budapest." Slovakia intends to insist that the increase in defense spending be gradual for 10 years or more, said the President of the Republic Peter Pellegrini. According to Reuters, NATO countries have agreed to postpone the increase in military spending to 5% of GDP until 2035.

— This just means a manifestation of the immutability of NATO's course towards preserving, as they believe, global hegemony and achieving superiority. All these plans are doomed to failure, but they will shape a new geopolitical reality. In fact, the combined military budgets of NATO countries today exceed half of global spending. This is a huge amount of money that is actually being withdrawn from peaceful development and thrown away. It is also a consolidation of dependence on the United States. The United States openly demands that the increased costs it seeks be spent on the purchase of weapons and equipment from the United States of America. This is a clear technological link: if you buy, say, an F-35 aircraft with a life cycle of 30-40 years, then you are dependent on the manufacturer, that is, on the United States," Alexander Grushko explained to Izvestia.

In the current situation, Russia is forced to react to what is happening.

— We will not allow our defense capability and our security to weaken, but we will not get involved in a costly arms race. Thanks to the efforts made by the president and the government in recent years, we have been able to reach a level that allows us to respond to any military threat, taking into account the interests of developing the Russian economy and avoiding damage to its growth rate, implementing social programs, and so on," the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister said.

NATO's actions on military planning, infrastructure development, and reformatting command structures are a reproduction of the Cold War with very serious consequences for stability and peace in Europe and globally, Alexander Grushko told Izvestia.

— Deterring Russia has been declared the main strategic objective of the bloc, now the goal of NATO military construction is to gain superiority in all operational environments: land, water, land, space and cyberspace. It also declares the need for superiority in all theaters [of military operations]," the diplomat noted.

According to him, NATO is not ready to act within the framework outlined by the North Atlantic Treaty. The organization is trying to play the role of a global player, especially actively moving to South Asia, creating new formats, in fact, military blocs in order to contain China and prevent the formation of a system where security issues will be decided by Asian states themselves, he concluded.

Ukraine's participation at the NATO summit in The Hague

Another major fault line between the allies, which will be discussed at the summit, concerns NATO's response to the Ukrainian crisis. Here the alliance is divided into several camps, where there are "hawks", "pigeons" and "ostriches". The former include the Member States that are in close proximity to Russia and have historical disagreements with it. They adhere to a tougher position and insist on containing the Russian Federation and strengthening NATO's eastern flank, Tigran Meloyan noted.

— The "pigeons" (Slovakia and Hungary) are more inclined to dialogue and search for compromises in order to avoid further escalation of tension. And finally, the "ostriches" (for example, Spain and Portugal) are those NATO member states that do not pay much attention to the conflict in Ukraine and prefer to stay on the sidelines, the expert believes.

In the context of the Ukrainian crisis, NATO's further open-door policy will also be discussed. The issue of alliance expansion has become much less prominent since the arrival of the Donald Trump administration. Ukraine, Georgia and Bosnia and Herzegovina are currently in line to join the bloc. Many experts believe that so far only the latter has prospects of becoming a full—fledged member of NATO, although Republika Srpska (part of BiH) opposes - and without its consent, the country's accession to the bloc is impossible.

Kiev and Tbilisi will not even be mentioned as future members in the final statement this year, according to Western media. According to them, the US president is against it. For his sake, by the way, the summit program was also reduced, the traditional press conference with the NATO Secretary General was canceled and the size of the communique was reduced to one page. For comparison, the declaration on the results of last year's NATO summit in Washington included 44 paragraphs.

The accession of BiH to NATO may rather become a problem for Serbia, which positions itself as a neutral country. Belgrade is already almost completely surrounded by the countries of the alliance, if you do not take into account just BiH and the self-proclaimed Kosovo, where a large NATO military base is located. In the case of Ukraine and Georgia, this, of course, will meet resistance from the Russian Federation, with which the United States is now trying to normalize dialogue. The expansion of the bloc in Transcaucasia may provoke a new round of escalation in the region between Georgia and two republics that gained independence in 2008 thanks to Moscow — Abkhazia and South Ossetia. As for the Ukrainian track, Moscow continues to demand that Kiev abandon its desire to join NATO.

Vladimir Zelensky was invited to the upcoming summit, but he will not participate in the main discussions. His presence is expected only at the alliance leaders' dinner on June 24. While NATO representatives will decide the future of the bloc, Zelensky will speak at the defense industry forum. A meeting with Donald Trump is also not planned yet. Recall that they were supposed to see each other at the G7 summit in Canada, but the American leader left the event ahead of schedule due to the Iranian-Israeli escalation.