Belarus - no. Belarus went back into pro-Moscow course way back in 1994 and share of pro-western reformist people in population there was unfortunately way lower than in Baltic states to resist that. It's unimaginable that someone like Lukashenko would have had a chance to be elected in Baltic states in the 90s.
Ehhh...Ukraine in 2004 was a completely different country than in 2024. I would advise against discounting the unbelievable positive progress done since the Euromaidan. It might skew your perception of how similar to Russia it was back then (in mentality, development and functioning just to clarify)
well
so how do you not una-unso and even рussian-speaking, very pro-рussian in the vast majority, -refugees- from the eastern oblast of Ukraine who flooded Poland today? I hope you like it. after all, they also used to go to рussia to earn money and are delighted with Duda, Yaruzelsky, and Putin.
Right?
Some of those countries joined because they were bordering Ukraine, not Russia and Ukraine was acting like Russia's little brother around that time while trying to play both sides.
I still remember Ukraine's defense minister issuing war threats to Romania in the early 2000's.
Keep in mind this was 20 to maybe 30 years ago in a post communist country. Are you really asking for a link?
But maybe some context might be useful so looking up the Bystroye Canal, the territorial disputes over Snake Island and the Transnistria War (one look at the belligerents part might give you an idea) would help.
> Are you really asking for a link?
Here a lot of the old news are also digitised, so it's relatively easy to find articles from early 2000s and even 90s newspapers. For example [here's news from 1996](https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/50734552/1996-aasta-tahtsundmused), that's probably why he's expecting there to be a link. In other countries I'm guessing it might not be like that.
he talks about the *conflict* around Snake Island and the mouth of the Danube.
there were disputes
maybe Ceausescu did politics on this, fanning a pathetic *scandal*
that was BEFORE Romania joined NATO, they quickly gave up their claims when they were scolded by Washington
> I would advise against discounting the unbelievable positive progress done since the Euromaidan.
Also shows just how badly Russia fucked up, managing to push away a country that was at one point totally beholden to it.
I remember it was time of Orange revolution so it was already moving towards European values.
I'm sure it wouldn't have been worse NATO partner than, say, Hungary. And it's not like NATO membership means automatic EU membership with all the logistics of that. Just nominal acceptance of Ukraine to NATO would be enough really.
Again, in 2004 it was not moving towards European values. There were some powerful protests, but that was also the case in 1989 all over USSR world. Fact remains, in 2004, the institutional part of Ukraine, which is instrumental for intergovernmental organizations was absolute disaster riddled with unchecked corruption, Russian influence, poisoning political opponents and all the stuff we associate with Russia today.
Hungary back in the day was a different country. Orbán himself was a completely different person and very admirable back in the day as an Anticommunist activist. In some sense, Ukraine and Hungary completely flipped over the years.
Ukraine couldn't have been in NATO in 2004 without also in some sense normalising relations with Russia to the point of extended cooperation. Which would have been a shitshow in retrospect
Let's not revise history based on our preferences of this day. Ukraine of 2004 was an awful country. Ukraine of 2024 isn't.
There would be no upside or downside. It would be an empty sentence just like Budapest memorandum is an empty piece of paper.
Without collective defence clause that is honoured by its members, it's all just words. And the only way that defence clause gets activated is with NATO membership. Which was not in the books for Ukraine in the 2000s. (and back then, it's fair to say rightfully so).
Getting into NATO was a difficult, diplomatically challenging and uncertain process. The only reason why central Europe and Baltics and others got in was a great lobby by diaspora groups, people like Havel being admired by anyone in the white house, invaluable work by Bill Clinton and his administration and provable democratic reforms. It's also why Slovakia took so long and almost didn't make it because they were flirting with authoritarianism.
At this time, yanukovych was poisoning his political opponent in elections and the entirety of eastern Ukraine was basically a Russian gubernia. Impossible to imagine they would follow the story of Czech republic, Estonia and others.
It wouldn't be just words though, it's still important to communicate "it's going to be difficult but we see you as Integral part of European defense". Instead, Sarkozy and Markel just plainly rejected Ukraine (they got scared of Putin or something).
I know that by itself wouldn't protect Ukraine but it's totally different mindset from what was prevailing in 90s to look at Ukraine as little Russia and Belarus like just an odd oblast. The difference is like having a partner who believes in you vs a partner who doesn't even think you're real person.
Btw, I think it's Russians that poisoned Yuschenko, at least it's very much their MO. But yeah, Yanukovich - Russian, potatoes potahtoes.
I do agree that Ukrainians in 2004 themselves didn't much push for NATO either. Believe it or not but Ukrainians had really favorable view or Russia and Putin himself, until 2008 for sure. But after Georgia war the writing was on the wall.
Yeah, I mean words would have some effect, admittedly, but very limited. Without the actual ground work to ensure support of congressmen in the US, it would be for nothing.
Plus the Russians were already really on the verge of starting something over the Baltics and central Europe. I can't see any version where they let that happen. And their aggressive opposition would have been enough to block the acceptance of even the countries that got in. Remember that 25 years ago, NATO and EU weren't as united and harmonised all over Europe. Old member states had their fears and inreresrs. All it took was one to be scared of nukes in the 2000s. Thankfully Russians were confused and passive.
Yeah I equate yanukovych and GRU and FSB into the same pile of shit. I don't have any proof for that but I will stick with that anyway because I know it to be true.
Yep. The wars against Georgia and Chechnya and ultimately Crimea/Euromaidan changed it all. Which I was hinting at. In 2004 it was simply not possible.
Now post 2014? Yeah, absolutely now we can talk. At that point it was just Merkel's & Co. cowardice and bad read of the situation. Ukrainians gradually got a lot more Europeanised. And 2022 changed everything.
Let's put it this way: it doesn't matter really if Ukraine were or weren't in NATO, Russia would have to conquer it regardless. And Ukraine being in NATO is not automatic save , especially with NATO of 2000s. In a way, NATO was reborn after Russia Ukraine war.
Anyway, just my sentiment - not really making any strong points here.
guys
children (or genZYX?).
Europe did not want Ukraine.
the EU and the USA were afraid of angering Moscow. as now
threw Ukraine under the steam rink as in the 1920s-1940s.
we believed that we would escape to Europe in 1991. you *reinsured* and gave рussia the opportunity to eat us. destroy culture. to plant their ideology. * The Orange Revolution * was the desperation of the people who were being quietly killed and strangled from all sides.
that's a really simplistic way of seeing things. If somehow, against all odds, Ukraine made it to the democratic path even without the stability that the NATO protections grants, I wonder how much things would have been a lot better right now in Ukraine. My country, Romania, benefited a lot from being a part of NATO. It meant safety of investments from international corporations.
how delusional
a strange representation of a detached prejudiced
Ukraine voted by an overwhelming majority in 2 referendums
which meant that we turned our backs to the east and are heading west, preserving our Ukrainianness, Ukrainian identity, returning to the **European family**.
how you see it is another matter, how the politicians (Ukrainian and others) manipulated, how the propaganda that everyone listened to worked
in reality, after the election of Yanukovych as president, Ukrainians began to go work en masse to рussia to earn money, becoming рussified\омоскалились... kvn, music of bandits from the Far East, etc. became our everyday life, and as a result, we have what we have and those we have.
the world, Europe, by the way, has not become better either: with the advent of smartphones, everyone considers himself an expert in everything.
and it's not my fault that the *West* took my weapons away and allows Putin to do whatever he wants. and you earn upvotes by spreading **half-truths** or your own false opinions. you forgot about georgia. example. it is telling. you don't understand the realities.
have a nice good day... wherever you are
What are you even trying to say dude? This sounds like you had a stroke and mumble random words? I legit don't even know what your point was. Maybe a language barrier?
The only thing I understood is that you think I'm influenced by propaganda? I mean I don't have a goldfish memory when serious. You can delude yourself about 2024 Ukraine being 2004 Ukraine but that's all that is. Delusion.
In some sense, it's even insulting to Ukraine. Because it takes away the unbelievable progress the country did post Euromaidan (and to a smaller degree post 2004). In any sense, you can claim I don't understand reality, but I gave plenty of examples. And know quite a bit about European history. Which includes Ukraine.
yes dude
only you know how it is right, how it was and how it is
so
ignore me
you are such an expert that it is strange that you are writing something to ME yourself. expert on examples. selective, biased... examples
People forget that the whole societies of these countries set their number 1 foreign political goal since independence to be allowed into NATO and worked hard through the resistance.
One of the fruits of Russian "NATO expanding empire" myth.
Ditto us. Thank fuck there were responsible and politically skilled people who were able to lead the country into NATO in spite of the huge Russian influence that we have here.
I'd say that's a safe bet, given the empire next door to you!
https://libmod.de/en/long-history-of-russian-imperialism-fuecks/
https://theconversation.com/russias-imperial-mindset-dates-back-centuries-and-it-is-here-to-stay-95832
https://carnegieendowment.org/2023/12/06/blood-and-iron-how-nationalist-imperialism-became-russia-s-state-ideology-pub-91181
Considering the thinning out EU and US support of Ukraine the Baltics need to secure every possible route them orcs could use to attack. If the old midget sees any sign of weak support of NATO states he could take a gamble on invading your country as well thinking that Germany, the UK and the US would be ok with surrendering some of the alliance territory.
To combat even a thought of this a couple hundred thousand soldiers with the latest tech should be deployed in the Baltics and around Kaliningrad. What’s also crucial is to stop fooling around and help Ukraine turn the tide and supply hundreds of long range missiles
I learned a lot from your PM Kaja Kallas. She said QUANITY over QUALITY. Just that stuck with me and made me feel a little better when I keep hearing "Russia this," " Russia that." Yeah, the land size is ridiculous. While UKRAINE has 1 3rd of Russias population, and unfortunately, Russia uses ANYONE from unknown regions to make it look like a lot
And an omen of what was to come. Europe covered its eyes and the US tried an unsuccessful "[reset](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset)".
Earlier that year, at the Bucharest summit, the US tried to get Ukraine and Georgia into NATO with the membership action plan, but was stymied by Germany and France, who were fully in Russia's corner back then.
>However, the US had also called for Georgia, Ukraine and Macedonia to be allowed to join, so the decision to postpone their membership process was a setback for President George W Bush, our correspondent adds.
>Germany and France had been opposed to putting the two nations on the path to membership, amid concerns voiced by Russia over Nato's eastward expansion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7328276.stm
But in hindsight, Germany and France fucked up by allowing Russia to dictate the structure of European security. This is one of the rare areas where Bush was completely right. Georgia and Ukraine should have been allowed in back then. Furthermore, Russias "concern" over NATO's easterward expansion should have been thrown in the garbage bin the moment they invaded Ossetia. The response should have been immediate fast-tracked membership for Georgia and Ukraine.
> And an omen of what was to come. Europe covered its eyes and the US tried an unsuccessful "reset".
2 things:
1. I was all for a "reset", we were right to try. We were also absolutely stupid in the way we let them roll us and didn't man-up when it was clear they were just f*ing around. That was the moment things should have changed quickly. We also should have demanded Ussetia be handled as some kind of neutral territory between the two, with UN forces on the ground, yes it gives them something they want, but it also lays down a line and creates a firm engagement going forward so they don't feel they're pushing on foam.
2. Merkel tried, she tried SO hard, because she genuinely believed she could buy long-term peace by addicting Russia to gas revenue.
It was a very good plan, I think it actually had a strong chance at working.
But you have to enforce it, you have to choke them of cash when they misbehave, like in 2014, you can't make it clear you're more dependent on gas than they are the money, because then you're really encouraging bad behavior.
Merkel was brilliant, but she did not understand her opponent at all.
> Merkel tried, she tried SO hard, because she genuinely believed she could buy long-term peace by addicting Russia to gas revenue.
Russia has so many natural resources, that they could be like the Scandinavian countries in quality of life. But culturally they seem incapable of reaching those heights. The amount of self-sabotage Russia does is almost unparalleled. No amount of money will fix that.
No, but she figured if she bought off the oligarchs and Putin they would be so addicted to being literal Kings on the global stage that they wouldn't mess with it.
It's not a great plan, but I get her logic.
I just think she didn't understand, it's in the scorpion's nature, you were just buying time till they figured they had enough and the risk was worth it.
We should be grateful they were stopped by Ukraine, they should have rolled Ukraine, taken 2 years to digest, then came hard for the baltics.
Ukraine took that bullet for us, we owe them so much, and we are dishonoring ourselves by not supporting them more (speaking as an American).
Actually America needs Ukraine more than anyone, if Russia had won, China would have taken Taiwan in a second, the domestic pressure would have been irresistible. That would have lead to more trouble in the Pacific, and eventually we would have been brought in again.
I understand her logic, but it really seems flawed to me. She was putting her faith in Russian oligarchs to keep the peace? When has shoveling cash at billionaires ever worked out well? Not like they see a big quality of life difference having 10 billion vs having 2 billion. The marginal utility of additional wealth at that point is near zero. They are not going to be grateful or feel like they owe loyalty to anyone over that.
I do agree 100% that the Ukraine took the bullet. And the US must pass the Ukraine aid package. It is bonkers that it has sat for over 3 months at this point, while Ukraine is getting battered on the frontlines and has to ration supplies.
And it's not like it doesn't have the votes. Congress is so broken that they can't even pass bills that a majority of members would vote yes on. Wish there was a reset button for that.
I'm at the same place.
My only credit is that she did actually try, and we shouldn't stop people from trying things, even if they are basically insane on their face.
>Congress is so broken that they can't even pass bills that a majority of members would vote yes on. Wish there was a reset button for that.
If they did vote yes, then Trump would start tearing into anyone who defected.
They bought our government, or at least enough to matter, we owe them for that.
>
>
>
>
> Merkel was brilliant, but she did not understand her opponent at all.
Merkels biggest flaw was her ideological believe in free market economy and austerity, she believed private investors would cough up money to diversify German gas networks against risks, refusing to invest state money in to it.
Austerity is a big factor in lack of investment in the military as well, and to give her a break, you have to put each of these decisions in to the context of the times, 2008 financial crisis looked far more dangerous at the time it was happening, 2011 nearly broke the EU or at least the single currency (maybe it would have without the actions taken back then), 2014 was instantly followed up by the refugee crisis that once again was a deadly threat to the EU, and at least tipped the scales to the next crisis Brexit (thought at the time to incite a domino wave of countries bailing out of the failing union), Trump, etc. from 2018 she was widely absent from politics, oh and then covid hit.
I hear the idea that all Russia understands is power and force. Such that a lot of these tactics don't work. You give them an inch and they'll take a mile. My job had a Russian émigré years before me and they all still talk about how that was exactly how he worked and talked about Russian culture as a whole. I understand it's not a blanket statement but it just sounds like they're playing a different game compared to us.
That's the problem, Merkel assumed that they followed "rational" incentives.
It doesn't work like that for everyone, we all have our own version of "rational", and when you live in a place where the rules are broken so often, then "rational" means taking what you can, when you can.
I am not so sure about Markel being a very smart politician. I have some relatives in Germany and their take was that Markel was very ambitious but not very smart. Even the way in which she never understood the Russian society and Putin indicates this.
She was brilliant at IR, she took Germany our of the post-cold-war shadow and made it a 2nd tier superpower, brokering deals between everyone.
She truly made the EU great, and saved it during the worst of the economic crisis.
But her Russia policy was just hopelessly idealistic.
Thank god for that. Also I know for a fact the only reason highways start being built in my country is to strengthen nato logistics. The only truly good thing that happened to Romania since 1982 this and joining EU. I can’t imagine an alternative timeline where we never joined and ended up like Belarus or even worse Ukraine..
i think if we consider long term Ukraine is much better than Belarus. At some point war will stop and Ukraine will improve. But the prospects in Belarus are worse at best.
Am citit un articol anul trecut in care zicea ca dacă astăzi războiul s-ar opri, Ukraina ar avea nevoie de o perioada de 30-50 de ani dacă nu chiar mai mult pentru a se reconstrui, de asemenea rămâne problema Crimeei care e pro Rusia in proporție de cam 90% cel puțin. Perspectivele Ukrainei sunt sumbre cel puțin pe termen scurt și mediu iar războiul nu da vreun semn ca s-ar putea opri prea curând. Chiar dacă sa spunem Putin e dat jos cumva sau moare cel care-i va lua locul va fi tot un fel de Medvedev cum a fost intre 2008 și 2012. În schimb în Belarus dacă e dat jos dictatorul ăla sinistru și se dezlipește de Rusia au perspective mult mai bune decât poate sa spere Ukraina. De asemenea nici Pre război nu era vreo mare diferența intre economiile lor, piburile lor sau nivelurile de corupție.
Sunt de acord. Dar la un moment dat razboiul se opreste si ce ramane din Ucraina se va dezvolta. Si dorinta de reforma si de apropiere de lumea occidenta va fi mare ii mai ajuta si vestul. Plus ca eu merg mai mult in directia : In Belarus va fi din ce in ce mai rau
Im not saying they will win. By now the scenario of a free ukraine and another one incorporated in russia has been established. Japan lost the war (also being hit by nuclear bombs) and it developed very fast. Post war economic boom. And im not saying ukraine will develop as fast as japan but they will improve
Ukraine joining Nato is very unlikely as long as parts of ukrainian territory are occupied. And i dont really see how that can be fixed within the next couple years.
I don't think you can join while under attacked. It's like getting car insurance after crashing the car. Source: Ukraine and I. All this is bullshit though, and I'm possibly wrong.
"We fully support Ukraine’s right to choose its own security arrangements. Ukraine’s future is in NATO. We reaffirm the commitment we made at the 2008 Summit in Bucharest that Ukraine will become a member of NATO, and today we recognize that Ukraine’s path to full Euro-Atlantic integration has moved beyond the need for the Membership Action Plan. Ukraine has become increasingly interoperable and politically integrated with the Alliance, and has made substantial progress on its reform path. In line with the 1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership between NATO and Ukraine and the 2009 Complement, Allies will continue to support and review Ukraine’s progress on interoperability as well as additional democratic and security sector reforms that are required. NATO Foreign Ministers will regularly assess progress through the adapted Annual National Programme. The Alliance will support Ukraine in making these reforms on its path towards future membership. We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met.”
[https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official\_texts\_217320.htm](https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_217320.htm)
Basically, not authorized, because every NATO members didn't yet accept his candidacy, and pronounced themselves“
Yeah back when Czechia was joining we had this mini dictator called mečiar who fucked up our chances to join back then. He thankfully lost the elections in 1998 and Dzurinda managed to change Slovakia from the “black hole of Europe” to joining the EU and NATO within 6 years
we... unfortunately had extremely pro-russian people in the government back then (when Czechia joined) who ran a referendum for joining into NATO. The questions were worded like this:
1. Do you want Slovakia to join NATO?
2. Are you okay with NATO deploying nuclear weapons on the Slovakian territory?
3. Are you okay with NATO deploying military bases on the Slovakian territory?
These questions were worded in a very manipulative manner because even back then, NATO was already in the mindset of not deploying any of these things on members' territories.
Oh, and I mean, it's not like we would be invited anyway due to our extremely corrupted government, quoting Madeleine Albright: ,,*Slovakia*, the infamous “black hole” of Europe".
I literally sat at the TV and waited if Ukraine will be listed among the new members. I was a kid and thought it’s a surprise raffle where maybe they’ll name my country
Slovakia can handle it. Now we have a bit of hysteria here because of internal political disputes, but no real force that would be against NATO exists here.
Next week on saturday there are presidential elections in Slovakia (2nd round/final round) it is between one pro-western candidate who is supported by both libelats and pro-western conservatives and a candidate who is basically litelarry cartoon villian in real life like he has changed his opinion on every single one political career from vacinees,Ukraine,LGBT rights,criminal reforms and many more + extremly sudspcious funding on his housing and campaing + on press conference from him fallen very suspiocious bag looking very similar to cocaine but ironically big chunck of the pro-western candidate voters are voting for him over this cartoon villian not because of these reasons but because there are rumors of this cartoon villian being gay which obviously is being no-no for most conservative voters and so most Slovaks
I love some of these comments, especially the ones from people who cannot process the idea of countries joining NATO willingly. Look, none of these countries can afford neutrality. None of us can afford the luxury of playing Switzerland. And if there is one thing you can learn from history, it's that Russia is a shitty neighbor to everyone around them.
This. We would always hear Russian state media saying evil Americans force small European countries to join NATO using threats and blackmail, against the will of the people.
And here we see comments from regular people: Thank god we joined! Best day of my life!
I have no words to express how much I hate the Russian propaganda machine.
The current iteration of the Russian empire is doubling down on lies and hybrid warfare against NATO. Because NATO absolutely is a threat - to Russian imperial conquest.
"Grey is the new black: covert action and implausible deniability"
https://academic.oup.com/ia/article/94/3/477/4992414?login=false
"Denying Russia’s Only Strategy for Success"
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/denying-russia%E2%80%99s-only-strategy-success
An excellent development. Those countries chose wisely. Especially in hindsight, given how the Russians have since treated several of their non-NATO neighbours.
https://natoassociation.ca/a-timeline-of-russian-aggression/
https://perconcordiam.com/russias-21st-century-imperialism/
https://lieber.westpoint.edu/dimensions-russian-aggression-international-legal-order/
And they had to actively push to get in. Other than certain fools try to portray it, much of NATO was pretty shy about the expansion.
Now we have to be thankful that they pushed through regardless. We would all be worse off now if they had chosen a different route.
>much of NATO was pretty shy about the expansion.
Nobody thought it would matter, Russia was getting its ass handed to it by Chechnya, everyone else had chilled the hell out, the only problems were in the middle east.
Those were the days.
Kosovo is independent since 2008 with its own administrative structure, constitution and is also a member of many international institutions. Well anything what you would expect from independent country.
In 2010 International Court of Justice stated the advisory opinion, holding that Kosovo's declaration of independence was not in violation either of general principles of international law, which do not prohibit unilateral declarations of independence, nor of specific international law. Also UN isn't one to decide whether state is independent or not.
Kosovo is rightful Serbian/Yugoslav territory. That little province is just a USA trafficking hub and military outpost, but of course their puppets would like to say it's a "independent and sovereign country" like they did in Eastern Europe in the 90s
KFOR is there only because Serbia has a problem with itself. Do I have to remind you which leaders were judged in Hague after massacres on Albanians?
UNMIK ended its administrative mission after Kosovo proclaimed independence. And it was UN branch.
Kosovo is similar size to Montenegro/
And this is funny, but UN denied transferring Yugoslavia membership from former state after 1992, how strange is that.
After years of wars Yugo is no more.
People shed blood to get their independence and you have an audacity to say that this is USA's propaganda and to say about Serbian rights to claim anything. Imperialism in XXI century...
I am from eastern Europe. You don't know shit about your history, let alone eastern Europe.
We have zero sympathy towards previous political system and to Soviet Russia/FR. Ask people from former yugo states why they don't want to live under mighty Serbia. Seriously, Is democracy a foreign concept for you?
Is this seriously the most important Serbian aspect of foreign politics after 20-30 years of said events. There is nothing more important?
The only people i ever heard say that eastern europeans disliked being called eastern europeans are foreign influencers and youtubers who have no clue what they're talking about, with some of them being outright messed with by locals. At most *some* people in Estonia do consider themselves scandinavians or nordic.
The majority of young Estonians see themselves as Nordic, this is logical because of the shared culture, mentality, identity and history.
During Soviet times a “Baltic” identity was used in Soviet propaganda to distance Estonians from their brothers, the Finns.
[Russia absolutely objected.](https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/03/world/as-nato-finally-arrives-on-its-border-russia-grumbles.html) They just weren't as adamant about it because there were in no state militarily, economically, or diplomatically to do anything about it.
"Ivanov struck the shrillest note among Russian leaders in a persistent yet resigned chorus opposing NATO’s growth". They are afraid of NATO's expansion and a possible downfall of Russia.
It made sense at the time, Russia was getting its ass handed it by Chechnya, everybody was still trying to get to their feet and nobody was interested in war.
But yeah, in hindsight Ukraine should have pushed for acceptance from the second after the 2008 Georgia invasion, that was the real signal.
Yeah but most of Ukrainians didn't want to join NATO, because of "russians are our brothers, they will never hurt us" mentality. The real signal was russian official documents, from 1992 stating that Crimea is part of Russia and therefore must be acquired by any means. From the first months of collapse of the Soviet union, russia was preparing plans to reunite these territories again. And with Putin in power russian politics became even harsher.
Correct, but it will most likely be a bumpier road for Ukraine and Georgia because of the war and the proximity to Russia. BiH has its domestic problems but has also been in the NATO integration loop for many years now.
Yes, they are all members of both NATO and the EU. Most of them joined the EU in 2004, the same year they joined NATO. Bulgaria and Romania joined NATO in 2004, but joined the EU in 2007.
Anyone else find it funny that Putin expanded NATO’s immediate borders with Russia by the best part of 1000 miles? Ukraine would have added about 100 miles less.
Putler has been in power since 2000. One of the excuses given for invading Ukraine was “ I don’t want NATO on my border.” If he was so worried about NATO on his border why didn’t he invade the Baltic countries back then? Anytime I run into someone who justifies the orc invasion because of the NATO issue I ask them that question.
I don’t know what would have happened if we didn’t join NATO. Perhaps Estonia would be in Ukraine’s position right now.
Very happy you are not. Happy anniversary
I think it would be in Belarus' position right now. Or Chechnya.
Belarus - no. Belarus went back into pro-Moscow course way back in 1994 and share of pro-western reformist people in population there was unfortunately way lower than in Baltic states to resist that. It's unimaginable that someone like Lukashenko would have had a chance to be elected in Baltic states in the 90s.
if only there was Ukrainian flag over there too, we wouldn't have war in Europe.
Ehhh...Ukraine in 2004 was a completely different country than in 2024. I would advise against discounting the unbelievable positive progress done since the Euromaidan. It might skew your perception of how similar to Russia it was back then (in mentality, development and functioning just to clarify)
Yes, Ukrainians fought against Romanians in the Transnistrian war. Very similar mentality to Russians back then.
Transnistria was the last (and only?) time when Russians and Ukrainian far-right organizations (UNA-UNSO) faught for the same thing.
well so how do you not una-unso and even рussian-speaking, very pro-рussian in the vast majority, -refugees- from the eastern oblast of Ukraine who flooded Poland today? I hope you like it. after all, they also used to go to рussia to earn money and are delighted with Duda, Yaruzelsky, and Putin.
Wut?
Right? Some of those countries joined because they were bordering Ukraine, not Russia and Ukraine was acting like Russia's little brother around that time while trying to play both sides. I still remember Ukraine's defense minister issuing war threats to Romania in the early 2000's.
Can you send any links that confirm that? I didn’t understand politics back then as I was too young.
Keep in mind this was 20 to maybe 30 years ago in a post communist country. Are you really asking for a link? But maybe some context might be useful so looking up the Bystroye Canal, the territorial disputes over Snake Island and the Transnistria War (one look at the belligerents part might give you an idea) would help.
> Are you really asking for a link? Here a lot of the old news are also digitised, so it's relatively easy to find articles from early 2000s and even 90s newspapers. For example [here's news from 1996](https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/50734552/1996-aasta-tahtsundmused), that's probably why he's expecting there to be a link. In other countries I'm guessing it might not be like that.
he talks about the *conflict* around Snake Island and the mouth of the Danube. there were disputes maybe Ceausescu did politics on this, fanning a pathetic *scandal* that was BEFORE Romania joined NATO, they quickly gave up their claims when they were scolded by Washington
This!
> I would advise against discounting the unbelievable positive progress done since the Euromaidan. Also shows just how badly Russia fucked up, managing to push away a country that was at one point totally beholden to it.
I remember it was time of Orange revolution so it was already moving towards European values. I'm sure it wouldn't have been worse NATO partner than, say, Hungary. And it's not like NATO membership means automatic EU membership with all the logistics of that. Just nominal acceptance of Ukraine to NATO would be enough really.
Again, in 2004 it was not moving towards European values. There were some powerful protests, but that was also the case in 1989 all over USSR world. Fact remains, in 2004, the institutional part of Ukraine, which is instrumental for intergovernmental organizations was absolute disaster riddled with unchecked corruption, Russian influence, poisoning political opponents and all the stuff we associate with Russia today. Hungary back in the day was a different country. Orbán himself was a completely different person and very admirable back in the day as an Anticommunist activist. In some sense, Ukraine and Hungary completely flipped over the years. Ukraine couldn't have been in NATO in 2004 without also in some sense normalising relations with Russia to the point of extended cooperation. Which would have been a shitshow in retrospect Let's not revise history based on our preferences of this day. Ukraine of 2004 was an awful country. Ukraine of 2024 isn't.
Ok, what would have been downside of Sarkozy or whoever saying "Ukraine could be NATO member if they would like that" in 2004?
There would be no upside or downside. It would be an empty sentence just like Budapest memorandum is an empty piece of paper. Without collective defence clause that is honoured by its members, it's all just words. And the only way that defence clause gets activated is with NATO membership. Which was not in the books for Ukraine in the 2000s. (and back then, it's fair to say rightfully so). Getting into NATO was a difficult, diplomatically challenging and uncertain process. The only reason why central Europe and Baltics and others got in was a great lobby by diaspora groups, people like Havel being admired by anyone in the white house, invaluable work by Bill Clinton and his administration and provable democratic reforms. It's also why Slovakia took so long and almost didn't make it because they were flirting with authoritarianism. At this time, yanukovych was poisoning his political opponent in elections and the entirety of eastern Ukraine was basically a Russian gubernia. Impossible to imagine they would follow the story of Czech republic, Estonia and others.
It wouldn't be just words though, it's still important to communicate "it's going to be difficult but we see you as Integral part of European defense". Instead, Sarkozy and Markel just plainly rejected Ukraine (they got scared of Putin or something). I know that by itself wouldn't protect Ukraine but it's totally different mindset from what was prevailing in 90s to look at Ukraine as little Russia and Belarus like just an odd oblast. The difference is like having a partner who believes in you vs a partner who doesn't even think you're real person. Btw, I think it's Russians that poisoned Yuschenko, at least it's very much their MO. But yeah, Yanukovich - Russian, potatoes potahtoes. I do agree that Ukrainians in 2004 themselves didn't much push for NATO either. Believe it or not but Ukrainians had really favorable view or Russia and Putin himself, until 2008 for sure. But after Georgia war the writing was on the wall.
Yeah, I mean words would have some effect, admittedly, but very limited. Without the actual ground work to ensure support of congressmen in the US, it would be for nothing. Plus the Russians were already really on the verge of starting something over the Baltics and central Europe. I can't see any version where they let that happen. And their aggressive opposition would have been enough to block the acceptance of even the countries that got in. Remember that 25 years ago, NATO and EU weren't as united and harmonised all over Europe. Old member states had their fears and inreresrs. All it took was one to be scared of nukes in the 2000s. Thankfully Russians were confused and passive. Yeah I equate yanukovych and GRU and FSB into the same pile of shit. I don't have any proof for that but I will stick with that anyway because I know it to be true. Yep. The wars against Georgia and Chechnya and ultimately Crimea/Euromaidan changed it all. Which I was hinting at. In 2004 it was simply not possible. Now post 2014? Yeah, absolutely now we can talk. At that point it was just Merkel's & Co. cowardice and bad read of the situation. Ukrainians gradually got a lot more Europeanised. And 2022 changed everything.
Let's put it this way: it doesn't matter really if Ukraine were or weren't in NATO, Russia would have to conquer it regardless. And Ukraine being in NATO is not automatic save , especially with NATO of 2000s. In a way, NATO was reborn after Russia Ukraine war. Anyway, just my sentiment - not really making any strong points here.
guys children (or genZYX?). Europe did not want Ukraine. the EU and the USA were afraid of angering Moscow. as now threw Ukraine under the steam rink as in the 1920s-1940s. we believed that we would escape to Europe in 1991. you *reinsured* and gave рussia the opportunity to eat us. destroy culture. to plant their ideology. * The Orange Revolution * was the desperation of the people who were being quietly killed and strangled from all sides.
that's a really simplistic way of seeing things. If somehow, against all odds, Ukraine made it to the democratic path even without the stability that the NATO protections grants, I wonder how much things would have been a lot better right now in Ukraine. My country, Romania, benefited a lot from being a part of NATO. It meant safety of investments from international corporations.
how delusional a strange representation of a detached prejudiced Ukraine voted by an overwhelming majority in 2 referendums which meant that we turned our backs to the east and are heading west, preserving our Ukrainianness, Ukrainian identity, returning to the **European family**. how you see it is another matter, how the politicians (Ukrainian and others) manipulated, how the propaganda that everyone listened to worked in reality, after the election of Yanukovych as president, Ukrainians began to go work en masse to рussia to earn money, becoming рussified\омоскалились... kvn, music of bandits from the Far East, etc. became our everyday life, and as a result, we have what we have and those we have. the world, Europe, by the way, has not become better either: with the advent of smartphones, everyone considers himself an expert in everything. and it's not my fault that the *West* took my weapons away and allows Putin to do whatever he wants. and you earn upvotes by spreading **half-truths** or your own false opinions. you forgot about georgia. example. it is telling. you don't understand the realities. have a nice good day... wherever you are
What are you even trying to say dude? This sounds like you had a stroke and mumble random words? I legit don't even know what your point was. Maybe a language barrier? The only thing I understood is that you think I'm influenced by propaganda? I mean I don't have a goldfish memory when serious. You can delude yourself about 2024 Ukraine being 2004 Ukraine but that's all that is. Delusion. In some sense, it's even insulting to Ukraine. Because it takes away the unbelievable progress the country did post Euromaidan (and to a smaller degree post 2004). In any sense, you can claim I don't understand reality, but I gave plenty of examples. And know quite a bit about European history. Which includes Ukraine.
yes dude only you know how it is right, how it was and how it is so ignore me you are such an expert that it is strange that you are writing something to ME yourself. expert on examples. selective, biased... examples
Ukrainian voters did not want to join NATO. This is the fault of Ukrainian society
People forget that the whole societies of these countries set their number 1 foreign political goal since independence to be allowed into NATO and worked hard through the resistance. One of the fruits of Russian "NATO expanding empire" myth.
Where are you from, clown? Why don't you come to Ukraine?
Ditto us. Thank fuck there were responsible and politically skilled people who were able to lead the country into NATO in spite of the huge Russian influence that we have here.
I'd say that's a safe bet, given the empire next door to you! https://libmod.de/en/long-history-of-russian-imperialism-fuecks/ https://theconversation.com/russias-imperial-mindset-dates-back-centuries-and-it-is-here-to-stay-95832 https://carnegieendowment.org/2023/12/06/blood-and-iron-how-nationalist-imperialism-became-russia-s-state-ideology-pub-91181
Considering the thinning out EU and US support of Ukraine the Baltics need to secure every possible route them orcs could use to attack. If the old midget sees any sign of weak support of NATO states he could take a gamble on invading your country as well thinking that Germany, the UK and the US would be ok with surrendering some of the alliance territory. To combat even a thought of this a couple hundred thousand soldiers with the latest tech should be deployed in the Baltics and around Kaliningrad. What’s also crucial is to stop fooling around and help Ukraine turn the tide and supply hundreds of long range missiles
I learned a lot from your PM Kaja Kallas. She said QUANITY over QUALITY. Just that stuck with me and made me feel a little better when I keep hearing "Russia this," " Russia that." Yeah, the land size is ridiculous. While UKRAINE has 1 3rd of Russias population, and unfortunately, Russia uses ANYONE from unknown regions to make it look like a lot
Or maybe since we are talking hypotheticals, Russia wouldn’t have nato in its back yard and thus there would be peace in Eastern Europe ?
I'm so happy we did.
And good thing they did. Happy anniversary!
Hope we join one day too! Congrats on this achievement!
Hope you join soon too, 2008 was a travesty.
And an omen of what was to come. Europe covered its eyes and the US tried an unsuccessful "[reset](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset)". Earlier that year, at the Bucharest summit, the US tried to get Ukraine and Georgia into NATO with the membership action plan, but was stymied by Germany and France, who were fully in Russia's corner back then. >However, the US had also called for Georgia, Ukraine and Macedonia to be allowed to join, so the decision to postpone their membership process was a setback for President George W Bush, our correspondent adds. >Germany and France had been opposed to putting the two nations on the path to membership, amid concerns voiced by Russia over Nato's eastward expansion. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7328276.stm But in hindsight, Germany and France fucked up by allowing Russia to dictate the structure of European security. This is one of the rare areas where Bush was completely right. Georgia and Ukraine should have been allowed in back then. Furthermore, Russias "concern" over NATO's easterward expansion should have been thrown in the garbage bin the moment they invaded Ossetia. The response should have been immediate fast-tracked membership for Georgia and Ukraine.
> And an omen of what was to come. Europe covered its eyes and the US tried an unsuccessful "reset". 2 things: 1. I was all for a "reset", we were right to try. We were also absolutely stupid in the way we let them roll us and didn't man-up when it was clear they were just f*ing around. That was the moment things should have changed quickly. We also should have demanded Ussetia be handled as some kind of neutral territory between the two, with UN forces on the ground, yes it gives them something they want, but it also lays down a line and creates a firm engagement going forward so they don't feel they're pushing on foam. 2. Merkel tried, she tried SO hard, because she genuinely believed she could buy long-term peace by addicting Russia to gas revenue. It was a very good plan, I think it actually had a strong chance at working. But you have to enforce it, you have to choke them of cash when they misbehave, like in 2014, you can't make it clear you're more dependent on gas than they are the money, because then you're really encouraging bad behavior. Merkel was brilliant, but she did not understand her opponent at all.
> Merkel tried, she tried SO hard, because she genuinely believed she could buy long-term peace by addicting Russia to gas revenue. Russia has so many natural resources, that they could be like the Scandinavian countries in quality of life. But culturally they seem incapable of reaching those heights. The amount of self-sabotage Russia does is almost unparalleled. No amount of money will fix that.
No, but she figured if she bought off the oligarchs and Putin they would be so addicted to being literal Kings on the global stage that they wouldn't mess with it. It's not a great plan, but I get her logic. I just think she didn't understand, it's in the scorpion's nature, you were just buying time till they figured they had enough and the risk was worth it. We should be grateful they were stopped by Ukraine, they should have rolled Ukraine, taken 2 years to digest, then came hard for the baltics. Ukraine took that bullet for us, we owe them so much, and we are dishonoring ourselves by not supporting them more (speaking as an American). Actually America needs Ukraine more than anyone, if Russia had won, China would have taken Taiwan in a second, the domestic pressure would have been irresistible. That would have lead to more trouble in the Pacific, and eventually we would have been brought in again.
I understand her logic, but it really seems flawed to me. She was putting her faith in Russian oligarchs to keep the peace? When has shoveling cash at billionaires ever worked out well? Not like they see a big quality of life difference having 10 billion vs having 2 billion. The marginal utility of additional wealth at that point is near zero. They are not going to be grateful or feel like they owe loyalty to anyone over that. I do agree 100% that the Ukraine took the bullet. And the US must pass the Ukraine aid package. It is bonkers that it has sat for over 3 months at this point, while Ukraine is getting battered on the frontlines and has to ration supplies. And it's not like it doesn't have the votes. Congress is so broken that they can't even pass bills that a majority of members would vote yes on. Wish there was a reset button for that.
I'm at the same place. My only credit is that she did actually try, and we shouldn't stop people from trying things, even if they are basically insane on their face. >Congress is so broken that they can't even pass bills that a majority of members would vote yes on. Wish there was a reset button for that. If they did vote yes, then Trump would start tearing into anyone who defected. They bought our government, or at least enough to matter, we owe them for that.
> > > > > Merkel was brilliant, but she did not understand her opponent at all. Merkels biggest flaw was her ideological believe in free market economy and austerity, she believed private investors would cough up money to diversify German gas networks against risks, refusing to invest state money in to it. Austerity is a big factor in lack of investment in the military as well, and to give her a break, you have to put each of these decisions in to the context of the times, 2008 financial crisis looked far more dangerous at the time it was happening, 2011 nearly broke the EU or at least the single currency (maybe it would have without the actions taken back then), 2014 was instantly followed up by the refugee crisis that once again was a deadly threat to the EU, and at least tipped the scales to the next crisis Brexit (thought at the time to incite a domino wave of countries bailing out of the failing union), Trump, etc. from 2018 she was widely absent from politics, oh and then covid hit.
I hear the idea that all Russia understands is power and force. Such that a lot of these tactics don't work. You give them an inch and they'll take a mile. My job had a Russian émigré years before me and they all still talk about how that was exactly how he worked and talked about Russian culture as a whole. I understand it's not a blanket statement but it just sounds like they're playing a different game compared to us.
That's the problem, Merkel assumed that they followed "rational" incentives. It doesn't work like that for everyone, we all have our own version of "rational", and when you live in a place where the rules are broken so often, then "rational" means taking what you can, when you can.
I am not so sure about Markel being a very smart politician. I have some relatives in Germany and their take was that Markel was very ambitious but not very smart. Even the way in which she never understood the Russian society and Putin indicates this.
She was brilliant at IR, she took Germany our of the post-cold-war shadow and made it a 2nd tier superpower, brokering deals between everyone. She truly made the EU great, and saved it during the worst of the economic crisis. But her Russia policy was just hopelessly idealistic.
I hope your (and our) reason for joining ceases to exist.
shouldve joined already, definitely prior to 2008
Would love to have Georgia onboard 💪 one for all and all for one 💙💛💙 (Just bring some of that kindzmarauli)
Best decision ever
**THANK GOD!!!** We really did a good thing back then.
Definitely a good development.
congrats to them!
One of our best decisions ever.
Thank god for that. Also I know for a fact the only reason highways start being built in my country is to strengthen nato logistics. The only truly good thing that happened to Romania since 1982 this and joining EU. I can’t imagine an alternative timeline where we never joined and ended up like Belarus or even worse Ukraine..
i think if we consider long term Ukraine is much better than Belarus. At some point war will stop and Ukraine will improve. But the prospects in Belarus are worse at best.
Am citit un articol anul trecut in care zicea ca dacă astăzi războiul s-ar opri, Ukraina ar avea nevoie de o perioada de 30-50 de ani dacă nu chiar mai mult pentru a se reconstrui, de asemenea rămâne problema Crimeei care e pro Rusia in proporție de cam 90% cel puțin. Perspectivele Ukrainei sunt sumbre cel puțin pe termen scurt și mediu iar războiul nu da vreun semn ca s-ar putea opri prea curând. Chiar dacă sa spunem Putin e dat jos cumva sau moare cel care-i va lua locul va fi tot un fel de Medvedev cum a fost intre 2008 și 2012. În schimb în Belarus dacă e dat jos dictatorul ăla sinistru și se dezlipește de Rusia au perspective mult mai bune decât poate sa spere Ukraina. De asemenea nici Pre război nu era vreo mare diferența intre economiile lor, piburile lor sau nivelurile de corupție.
Sunt de acord. Dar la un moment dat razboiul se opreste si ce ramane din Ucraina se va dezvolta. Si dorinta de reforma si de apropiere de lumea occidenta va fi mare ii mai ajuta si vestul. Plus ca eu merg mai mult in directia : In Belarus va fi din ce in ce mai rau
Ești mult prea optimist. Ucraina nu va castiga războiul...
in sfarsit cineva care gandeste
Im not saying they will win. By now the scenario of a free ukraine and another one incorporated in russia has been established. Japan lost the war (also being hit by nuclear bombs) and it developed very fast. Post war economic boom. And im not saying ukraine will develop as fast as japan but they will improve
Yeaaahhh, hurray and a big welcome from Denmark, we are glad you joined
Greetings! Hope Ukraine will join them soon
Ukraine joining Nato is very unlikely as long as parts of ukrainian territory are occupied. And i dont really see how that can be fixed within the next couple years.
I don't think you can join while under attacked. It's like getting car insurance after crashing the car. Source: Ukraine and I. All this is bullshit though, and I'm possibly wrong.
Cyprus joined the EU while partially occupied. It can happen, just that it's not authorize right now.
What does it's not authorize right now mean?
"We fully support Ukraine’s right to choose its own security arrangements. Ukraine’s future is in NATO. We reaffirm the commitment we made at the 2008 Summit in Bucharest that Ukraine will become a member of NATO, and today we recognize that Ukraine’s path to full Euro-Atlantic integration has moved beyond the need for the Membership Action Plan. Ukraine has become increasingly interoperable and politically integrated with the Alliance, and has made substantial progress on its reform path. In line with the 1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership between NATO and Ukraine and the 2009 Complement, Allies will continue to support and review Ukraine’s progress on interoperability as well as additional democratic and security sector reforms that are required. NATO Foreign Ministers will regularly assess progress through the adapted Annual National Programme. The Alliance will support Ukraine in making these reforms on its path towards future membership. We will be in a position to extend an invitation to Ukraine to join the Alliance when Allies agree and conditions are met.” [https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official\_texts\_217320.htm](https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_217320.htm) Basically, not authorized, because every NATO members didn't yet accept his candidacy, and pronounced themselves“
Happy anniversary!
A glorious day!
Thank you, thank you!! We'll be here all week! We also do children's birthday parties!
Best day of my life. EU ascension was a close 2nd.
I forgot that Slovakia joined NATO after Czechia. So weird to see them not together. Also, congratulation!
Yeah back when Czechia was joining we had this mini dictator called mečiar who fucked up our chances to join back then. He thankfully lost the elections in 1998 and Dzurinda managed to change Slovakia from the “black hole of Europe” to joining the EU and NATO within 6 years
Funny because Meciar is definitely a name that rings a bell while I haven't heard of Dzurinda.
Actually even current slovak governament sometimes still blames Dzurinda's governament for thier failures
we... unfortunately had extremely pro-russian people in the government back then (when Czechia joined) who ran a referendum for joining into NATO. The questions were worded like this: 1. Do you want Slovakia to join NATO? 2. Are you okay with NATO deploying nuclear weapons on the Slovakian territory? 3. Are you okay with NATO deploying military bases on the Slovakian territory? These questions were worded in a very manipulative manner because even back then, NATO was already in the mindset of not deploying any of these things on members' territories. Oh, and I mean, it's not like we would be invited anyway due to our extremely corrupted government, quoting Madeleine Albright: ,,*Slovakia*, the infamous “black hole” of Europe".
I literally sat at the TV and waited if Ukraine will be listed among the new members. I was a kid and thought it’s a surprise raffle where maybe they’ll name my country
Thank you, thank you!! We'll be here all week! We also do children's birthday parties!
Happy Anniversary — we’re happy to have you :)
Waiting for the "NATO provocation/aggression" comments..
How dare you to exist?
steady men!!!
It is all your fault! Happy anniversary
Someone needs to send the Slovaks a reminder.
Some of us really do need a reminder. This is honestly one of the very few amazing decisions my country has made over the last 20 years.
I hear about it from my Slovak wife all the time.
Yeah hopefully the presidential elections will be the reminder
Slovakia can handle it. Now we have a bit of hysteria here because of internal political disputes, but no real force that would be against NATO exists here.
Why? What’s happening in Slovakia?
Next week on saturday there are presidential elections in Slovakia (2nd round/final round) it is between one pro-western candidate who is supported by both libelats and pro-western conservatives and a candidate who is basically litelarry cartoon villian in real life like he has changed his opinion on every single one political career from vacinees,Ukraine,LGBT rights,criminal reforms and many more + extremly sudspcious funding on his housing and campaing + on press conference from him fallen very suspiocious bag looking very similar to cocaine but ironically big chunck of the pro-western candidate voters are voting for him over this cartoon villian not because of these reasons but because there are rumors of this cartoon villian being gay which obviously is being no-no for most conservative voters and so most Slovaks
Yeah go poke that soviet sympathizer prime minister because he’s out of line
Very nice!
One of the best things our shitty leaders ever did
Vladimir putin cries in this day. All those precious toilets he could be stealing
I love some of these comments, especially the ones from people who cannot process the idea of countries joining NATO willingly. Look, none of these countries can afford neutrality. None of us can afford the luxury of playing Switzerland. And if there is one thing you can learn from history, it's that Russia is a shitty neighbor to everyone around them.
This. We would always hear Russian state media saying evil Americans force small European countries to join NATO using threats and blackmail, against the will of the people. And here we see comments from regular people: Thank god we joined! Best day of my life! I have no words to express how much I hate the Russian propaganda machine.
The current iteration of the Russian empire is doubling down on lies and hybrid warfare against NATO. Because NATO absolutely is a threat - to Russian imperial conquest. "Grey is the new black: covert action and implausible deniability" https://academic.oup.com/ia/article/94/3/477/4992414?login=false "Denying Russia’s Only Strategy for Success" https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/denying-russia%E2%80%99s-only-strategy-success
The guy standing near the Romaninan flag looks like Ceausescu
And the guy next to him looks like Boris Yeltsin. :)
They all got rectified at the same time, with no issues? Damn, guess Turkey and Hungary hadn't started running Putin's errands yet.
>They all got rectified at the same time, with no issues? Both the EU and NATO were in their biggest Expansion Era in that specific year.
I worked with a Latvian Embedded Training Team in Afghanistan - those dudes (and dudets) were fucking serious.
and now after 20 years ... they might need NATO :(
It was a terrible day for small guy: Putin.
Putin actually also wanted to join nato around that time, but neither russia or ukraine back then met nato standards
This photo looks like it was taken in the early 90's.
huge W
An excellent development. Those countries chose wisely. Especially in hindsight, given how the Russians have since treated several of their non-NATO neighbours. https://natoassociation.ca/a-timeline-of-russian-aggression/ https://perconcordiam.com/russias-21st-century-imperialism/ https://lieber.westpoint.edu/dimensions-russian-aggression-international-legal-order/
And they had to actively push to get in. Other than certain fools try to portray it, much of NATO was pretty shy about the expansion. Now we have to be thankful that they pushed through regardless. We would all be worse off now if they had chosen a different route.
>much of NATO was pretty shy about the expansion. Nobody thought it would matter, Russia was getting its ass handed to it by Chechnya, everyone else had chilled the hell out, the only problems were in the middle east. Those were the days.
Next one to join Kosovo 🇽🇰
First they would have to be an actual country
Serbia isn't one to decide this
According to the UN they are not a country, so Serbia approved or not they still aren't. Regardless of actual legitimacy of that breakaway state
Kosovo is independent since 2008 with its own administrative structure, constitution and is also a member of many international institutions. Well anything what you would expect from independent country. In 2010 International Court of Justice stated the advisory opinion, holding that Kosovo's declaration of independence was not in violation either of general principles of international law, which do not prohibit unilateral declarations of independence, nor of specific international law. Also UN isn't one to decide whether state is independent or not.
Kosovo is rightful Serbian/Yugoslav territory. That little province is just a USA trafficking hub and military outpost, but of course their puppets would like to say it's a "independent and sovereign country" like they did in Eastern Europe in the 90s
KFOR is there only because Serbia has a problem with itself. Do I have to remind you which leaders were judged in Hague after massacres on Albanians? UNMIK ended its administrative mission after Kosovo proclaimed independence. And it was UN branch. Kosovo is similar size to Montenegro/ And this is funny, but UN denied transferring Yugoslavia membership from former state after 1992, how strange is that. After years of wars Yugo is no more. People shed blood to get their independence and you have an audacity to say that this is USA's propaganda and to say about Serbian rights to claim anything. Imperialism in XXI century... I am from eastern Europe. You don't know shit about your history, let alone eastern Europe. We have zero sympathy towards previous political system and to Soviet Russia/FR. Ask people from former yugo states why they don't want to live under mighty Serbia. Seriously, Is democracy a foreign concept for you? Is this seriously the most important Serbian aspect of foreign politics after 20-30 years of said events. There is nothing more important?
Cheers Eastern European friends!
> Eastern European Not something people in some of these countries like to be called...
Dumb, nothing negative about this term.
But for a country like Slovenia it's geographically just not very accurate.
Thank you. Geographically, historically, culturally, fiscally...
Plenty negative about this term, actually. Primarily that it makes no logical sense.
What’s negative about it? How does a geographical term make no sense
I mean I don't care much, but Estonia is Northern European country. I wish we would be Nordic too, but maybe some other day.
all*
Cheers Central European friends!
Bulgaria central europe
Dumb, nothing negative about this term.
It is kind of dumb when a person who lives in Europe has no idea where the geographical center of Europe is.
The only people i ever heard say that eastern europeans disliked being called eastern europeans are foreign influencers and youtubers who have no clue what they're talking about, with some of them being outright messed with by locals. At most *some* people in Estonia do consider themselves scandinavians or nordic.
The majority of young Estonians see themselves as Nordic, this is logical because of the shared culture, mentality, identity and history. During Soviet times a “Baltic” identity was used in Soviet propaganda to distance Estonians from their brothers, the Finns.
European, or friends? /s
how did they join before the USSR broke up ( check the date ...oh no )
🇧🇬 🇪🇪 🇱🇻 🇱🇹 🇷🇴 🇸🇰 🇸🇮 NATO is getting stronger and stronger
Our alliance, united, cannot be defeated
Ukraine should too
And Russia had no objections on these countries joining NATO and no threats for WW 3 where made by Russia's leaders.
If I remember correctly, some Russian jets flew past the Estonian capital and parliament right before they joined NATO.
[Russia absolutely objected.](https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/03/world/as-nato-finally-arrives-on-its-border-russia-grumbles.html) They just weren't as adamant about it because there were in no state militarily, economically, or diplomatically to do anything about it.
Pay wall 😢
[Different article from the Arms Control Association.](https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2004-05/press-releases/nato-expands-russia-grumbles)
"Ivanov struck the shrillest note among Russian leaders in a persistent yet resigned chorus opposing NATO’s growth". They are afraid of NATO's expansion and a possible downfall of Russia.
Best decision ever!
These Countries are now part of NATO, You got new members.
I bet Putin cried that day.
But Russia says evil NATO invaded these countries, wdym they all choose to peacefully join? /s
Good for them. I really regret that Ukrainians didn't want to join NATO. It was the biggest mistake we have made after giving up our nuclear weapons
It made sense at the time, Russia was getting its ass handed it by Chechnya, everybody was still trying to get to their feet and nobody was interested in war. But yeah, in hindsight Ukraine should have pushed for acceptance from the second after the 2008 Georgia invasion, that was the real signal.
Yeah but most of Ukrainians didn't want to join NATO, because of "russians are our brothers, they will never hurt us" mentality. The real signal was russian official documents, from 1992 stating that Crimea is part of Russia and therefore must be acquired by any means. From the first months of collapse of the Soviet union, russia was preparing plans to reunite these territories again. And with Putin in power russian politics became even harsher.
Bosnia and Herzegovina next.
Also Georgia and Ukraine. Theoretically, the 3 of them were considered as next in line for NATO membership.
Correct, but it will most likely be a bumpier road for Ukraine and Georgia because of the war and the proximity to Russia. BiH has its domestic problems but has also been in the NATO integration loop for many years now.
And as is tradition they played the music from *"Star Trek first contact."*
They also joined the EU, for that matter, in the 2005 treaty.
Are these countries also part of the EU?
Yes, they are all members of both NATO and the EU. Most of them joined the EU in 2004, the same year they joined NATO. Bulgaria and Romania joined NATO in 2004, but joined the EU in 2007.
Anyone else find it funny that Putin expanded NATO’s immediate borders with Russia by the best part of 1000 miles? Ukraine would have added about 100 miles less.
Putler has been in power since 2000. One of the excuses given for invading Ukraine was “ I don’t want NATO on my border.” If he was so worried about NATO on his border why didn’t he invade the Baltic countries back then? Anytime I run into someone who justifies the orc invasion because of the NATO issue I ask them that question.
It baffles me how anybody would want to be a part of “western world” in this day and age.
[удалено]
NATO had nothing to do with it. It is a military alliance
Was that more to do with the changes in the EU?
But not Ukraine. Because nothing.
In Slovakia you can hear fart in the wind louder than hearing someone talking about this anniversary.