One of the main conflict moments in Russia's relations with the North Atlantic Alliance is the departure from oral agreements allegedly reached in 1990 with the participation of the Soviet leader. We have collected basic information that may indicate in favor of a particular version.

June 22, 2021 in the German weekly newspaper Die Zeit article Vladimir Putin "to be open, despite the past." Once again, the topic of NATO approximation to Russian borders was touched on in it. This is what, in particular, writes the President of the Russian Federation:

“We hoped that the end of the Cold War would be a common victory for Europe. It seemed a little more - and Charles de Gaulle’s dream of a single continent, not even the geographical “from the Atlantic to the Urals”, but the cultural, civilizational - from Lisbon to Vladivostok, would become a reality. It was in this logic - in the logic of building a large Europe, united by common values and interests - that Russia sought to develop its relations with Europeans. Both we and the European Union have been done a lot along this path.

But another approach prevailed. It was based on the expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance, which itself was a relic of the Cold War. Indeed, to confront the times of that era, it was created. It was the Blok’s movement to the east, which, by the way, began with the fact that the Soviet leadership actually persuaded the membership of the united Germany in NATO, that became the main reason for the rapid growth of mutual distrust in Europe. About the promises that were then, that “it is not directed against you”, that “the borders of the block will not approach you”, they hastened to quickly forget. And the precedent was created. And since 1999, five more waves of NATO expansion followed. The organization included 14 new countries, including the republics of the former Soviet Union, which actually buried hopes for the continent without separation lines. ”

In NATO and in the USA, the presence of such agreements is traditionally deny.

In the late 1980s, the collapse of the socialist system has not yet come, but the event was brewing, which eventually would become the beginning of this process,- Association of the GDR and Germany. The Berlin wall at that time already fell, and the West was negotiating with the USSR on the possible merging of the two German countries on the basis of the second of them, a powerful capitalist power. Soviet politicians were not fundamentally against, but at least some dividends sought to receive from their consent.

The first specific statements on this subject were made on January 31, 1990 from the lines of the Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Germany Hans-Ditrich Gensher in the Bavarian city of Tutzing. He reportedthat “changes in Eastern Europe and the process of unification of Germany should not lead to infringement of Soviet interests in the field of security,” and called on NATO to declare: “Whatever happens in countries Warsaw agreement, there will be no expansion of the territory of NATO to the East, that is, closer to the borders of the Soviet Union. ” It should be noted that the speech of Genscher was not agreed with the Chancellor of Germany Helmut Kolem, his competitor in anticipation of the approaching parliamentary elections, and in this act the minister sometimes sees an attempt to intercept the laurels of the German unifying.

This plan based on mutual concessions, which in the future They will call The “Tsing Formula”, the general of February 2, set out US Secretary of State James Baker on February 2, and on February 6, to the British Foreign Minister Douglas Hurda. The key, from the point of view of the conflict situation, became negotiations that took place on February 7-10 with the participation of the USSR. In particular, on February 9, Baker's meetings with the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze were held in Moscow. How Writes Mark Kramer, Director of the Cold War Program for the Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies named after Davis Harvard University, “Neither Baker nor Gorbachev have never raised the question of the possible distribution of membership in NATO to other countries of the Warsaw Treaty outside Germany. It would never have occurred to both politicians to discuss the issue that was not on the agenda either in Washington, nor in Moscow, or in any other capital of the Warsaw Treaty or NATO. ”

Is it really so? Today we have the opportunity to get acquainted with the transcript of both meetings, published (with some bills) US National Security Archive in 2017.

IN conversation Baker with Shevardnadze attention deserves the following quote from the American minister: “Of course, there should be iron guarantees that the field of jurisdiction or NATO forces will not be shifted to the east. And this should be done in such a way as to satisfy the eastern neighbors of Germany. ” Here, as we see, one cannot talk about the promise, just about what "should be."

A few hours later, James Baker, in the presence of the same Shevardnadze, met with Mikhail Gorbachev. Referring to the words of George Bush at the summit in Malta in December 1989, US Secretary of State declared: “The president and I made it clear that we are not striving for one -sided advantage in the process of [unification of Germany]. <...> We are aware of the need to provide guarantees of countries in the East. If we retain our presence in Germany, which is a member of NATO, there will be no expansion of NATO jurisdiction by a single inch to the east. <...> Would you prefer the united Germany outside NATO, independent and without the troops of the Alliance, or united Germany, which has a connection with NATO, with guarantees of non -division of the current jurisdiction of NATO east? ”

It turned out to be distorted here answer Gorbachev that the expansion of NATO is really unacceptable to the east, but Baker brought this quote on February 10 in his letter Helmut Kolya. And the last - in unison with the position of an American minister - on the same day at a meeting with Gorbachev expressed The opinion that “NATO should not expand” and you need to come to some decision.

In addition, on February 9, 1990, a similar guarantee (united Germany related to NATO, provided that “NATO troops will not go east further than they are located”) Offered Deputy Advisor to the US President for National Security Robert Gates in his conversation with the head of the KGB of the USSR Vladimir Kryuchkov.

From these transcripts, we can conclude that at the first stage of negotiations, the United States really promised the Soviet Union in the event of a German unification not to expand NATO to the east. What happened next and why then the West is not inclined to interpret the rhetoric of these days, although oral, but promise?

Shevardnadze welcomes Gensher and Kolya upon arrival in Moscow in February 1990.
Photo: AP / Victor Yurchenko

On May 18, 1990, Baker again met with Gorbachev in Moscow and introduced He has his own “nine points”, among which there was a transformation of NATO, strengthening European security structures, preserving the miraculous status of united Germany and taking into account Soviet interests in matters of his own security. However, no specifics regarding NATO expansion was mentioned to the east. It was not in the declaration adopted at the NATO summit on July 5–6, 1990 - only intentions to seriously reduce the military presence in Europe and conclude a number of agreements on reducing both ordinary and nuclear weapons. And the so -called "Agreement 2 + 4"Subjected on September 12 of the same year and regulating the foreign policy aspects of the unification of Germany, implied only the inability to deploy NATO troops (like any other foreign forces) in the former territory of the GDR.

As you can see, then the issue of NATO expansion to the east seemed to just fall out of the agenda. Different experts see their reasons for this. So, American international professor Joshua Shifrinson He thinksthat there was a significant change in the position of the West, crossing out early assurances and closed the opportunity to fix them for the Soviet leadership. Mark Kramer already mentioned above Obstacles To him, noting that the issue of territories east of the GDR was not the subject of negotiations in principle. The only thing they converge is that official promises to abandon NATO expansion to the east as a result were never sounded. The rest is rhetoric.

May 12, 2021, the London Analytical Center "Chatty House" published article, in which the subject of disputes is called the “myth” and it is said that Gorbachev did not ask and did not receive any official guarantees that the further expansion of NATO would not occur outside the territory of the united Germany. “At that time, this issue was not even discussed in NATO, since the organization of the Warsaw Treaty (bordering the united Germany in the east. - approx. Ed.), And the USSR still existed. Even if the days of the Warsaw Treaty were clearly considered, in the Western capitals in the fall of 1990 they did not expect that the USSR would collapse in a year, ”the authors of the article write. In addition, they note that in November 1990 the USSR signed Paris Charter with the obligation “to completely recognize the freedom of states to choose a way to ensure their security”, and seven years later was Signed The fundamental act of Russia is NATO, which confirmed the similar right of all countries.

In this situation, the statements of one of the main characters of those events - Mikhail Gorbachev, are worth the expression. Many years later, after the next expansion of NATO, in interview He complained to the German newspaper Bild that the West deceived Moscow, recalling those very “not a inch to the east” (in his version - “not a centimeter”). However, c interview The German Channel ZDF in 2014 Gorbachev declaredThat the issue of expanding NATO in those years was not discussed at all and did not arise. According to him, the subject of promise was NATO's non -expanding to the territory of the GDR, which was eventually recorded in the documents and is still being carried out. Could the words about "non -expanding to the East" mean only East Germany? In the interpretation of Gorbachev - perhaps, but from Correspondence between other Western participants in negotiations directly should, which at least in the inside of the National contacts was about the countries of Eastern and Central Europe, at that time while entering the Warsaw bloc. In 2017, in an interview with Oliver Stone Vladimir Putin criticized Gorbachev for the lack of written agreements on NATO non -expanding, to which the last objectedIt would be legally impossible to discuss a similar issue with a “living” Warsaw block.

However, even if Mikhail Sergeyevich finally clarifies his position, this is not able to affect the facts available today. It can be concluded that the issue of promises not to expand NATO east is the issue of interpretations. Firstly, the interpretation of the status and strength of the primary, February negotiations of 1990, which was not followed by official statements for the matter of interest to us in the days of signing key papers. Secondly, the interpretation of the powers of the American side, which, strictly speaking, is not equivalent to NATO. Thirdly, interpretation of the subject of negotiations (expansion to the territory of the GDR or outside the united Germany). And each side of the dispute in its rhetoric defends its set of interpretations. Therefore, it is impossible to give an unambiguous, indisputable assessment.