here's what I found when I searched "bookings institute Russia diplomacy:"
This maximalist intransigence is by no means limited to Ukraine. On December 17, 2021, the Kremlin sent two similar “draft treaties” to the White House and to NATO headquarters in Brussels which articulated the Kremlin’s goals for Europe with remarkable clarity.7 The demands in the proposals — which were immediately dismissed by their recipients — included not just a veto on Ukrainian membership in the alliance but a revision of the Euro-Atlantic security acquis of the post-Cold War period on enlargement, basing, deployments, exercises, and cooperation with partners. They would have severely limited U.S. freedom of movement in Europe (with no concomitant limitations on Russia), reversed 25 years of Central and Eastern European integration into NATO and the European Union, ended the right of non-members to choose their own alliances, and re-established a Russian sphere of influence on the continent.8 The coup de grâce was the final stipulation (Art. 7) of the draft U.S.-Russia treaty, that all nuclear weapons should be returned to their national territories: it would have meant the end of the U.S. nuclear umbrella over Europe and thus quite possibly of the alliance itself.
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the- ... the-enemy/
I'm a fan of "draft treaties," at least over militancy*
I think that Ukrainian membership in NATO should be weighed for its pros and cons, with one con being some adults in the room among US government knew, and know, that's a good way to provoke Russia into military conflict. And I caution thinking of NATO membership as some team sport.
regarding the post-cold war period, where have we heard fish's "not one inch" rhetoric before?
I dunno what they mean by "u.s. freedom of movement in Europe," but I'm guessing it's militant freedom of movement? To that I say, self-determination lulz. And if Russia includes no concomitant limitation of their own, fuck that.
re: reversing 25 years of NATO, that's prob not as dumb as it sounds, considering NATO was always a military alliance to counter the Soviet Union, which is now been dissolved for...oh, like 25 years or so?
I dunno what they mean by ending the right of non-members to choose their own alliances.
re: re-establishing a Russian sphere of influence on the continent, that sounds gross
and, the coup de grace: heaven forbid the United States aka the only war pigs to ever actually drop nukes on anyone, no longer get to put nukes whereever they want.
Now, I know I know, most of that is Russian propaganda. Especially the part about criticizing Russia, right!
if I really have to yet again explain this - and let's face it, I do! - it's that I'm being critical of ALL warmongering, not just picking and choosing which warmongering is good and which is bad, like you guys somehow manage to do.
*oh yeah, speaking of draft treaties, asking again: How many has NATO proposed?
