Russia has decided to freeze its diplomatic mission to NATO and curtail the alliance’s presence in Moscow. What does this mean in practice and what implications will this step have?
Representation of Russia to NATO
The Russian diplomatic mission at NATO headquarters was established in 1998. Until 2018, the number of its personnel could be up to 30 people, later – until 20.October 6, the alliance decided to cut the maximum number of the mission by half – to 10 people, as well as expel eight Russian diplomats, whom NATO called intelligence officers working under diplomatic cover … The cut was to take effect by the end of the month.
On October 18, Moscow decided to suspend the work of its mission to NATO altogether. According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, it is the “NATO members” who are not interested in “equal dialogue and joint work.” It has been a tradition in Moscow since the Cold War to not leave the expulsion of its diplomats unanswered. As a rule, the same number of diplomats from the other side was sent out as a “mirror” response.
Who represented NATO in Moscow?
This time, the Russian Federation acted asymmetrically. Why? A “mirror” answer was simply impossible. NATO has no diplomatic missions in other countries at all. The only exception is Ukraine, where there is a NATO office. It has existed since 2015 to organize practical cooperation.
Robert Pszczel
In Moscow, the alliance is represented by a military communications mission and an information bureau. The Russian Foreign Ministry decided to suspend the activities of the mission, and completely stop the work of the bureau. If there were two dozen people working in the Russian mission to NATO, there were only a few in Moscow. The last head of NATO’s information office in Moscow was Robert Pszczel – from 2010 to 2015. After that, until 2017, he was acting. in this position, but was in Brussels. The same was true of his successors – they ran the bureau from NATO headquarters. Only a few local employees, Russian citizens, worked in Moscow.
The composition of the military liaison mission in Moscow was also minimal. NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu told DW that there are three NATO military personnel on the mission.
What kind of contacts between NATO and Russia remain?
After the decision of the Russian Foreign Ministry, contacts between NATO and Russia will not stop. On the one hand, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg regularly meets and speaks by phone with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Sergei Lavrov and Jens Stoltenberg at a meeting in Brussels, 2015
On the other hand, there is direct contact between the military leadership of both sides. At NATO, these are the Commander-in-Chief of Allied Forces Europe, Tod Walters, and the Chairman of the Military Committee, Rob Bauer. From the Russian side – Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov. A hotline was established between them in case of incidents, and they also met and talked with each other on a regular basis. However, lately there has been a lull here as well. Walters spoke with Gerasimov in April 2020. And the last conversation, which became known, took place in July last year between Gerasimov and Bauer’s predecessor, Stuart Peach.
How NATO-Russia cooperation developed
Relations between NATO and Russia were established immediately after the end of the Cold War. In 1991, the Russian Federation joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council. And in 1994, practical cooperation began, when Russia began to participate in the Partnership for Peace program.
In 1997, the NATO-Russia Founding Act was signed, and in 2002, the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) was created. In the early 2000s, Russian President Vladimir Putin even admitted the country’s membership in the alliance. However, there was no serious discussion of this issue. But the practical cooperation between the parties at that time was very intense. For example, Russia provided support to the NATO mission in Afghanistan.
Relations between NATO and Russia have been frozen due to the 2008 Russia-Georgia war
2008 was a blow to relations. Back in April, the alliance made a “gift” to Russia when, under pressure from Germany and France, it refused to provide Ukraine and Georgia with a membership action plan. But the Russian-Georgian war broke out in August. In response to the actions of the Russian Federation, the alliance suspended the meetings of the CHP, however, only until the spring of next year.
And in 2014, NATO completely froze cooperation with the Russian Federation – in response to Russia’s illegal annexation of the Ukrainian Crimea and the war in Donbass. The CNR meetings were also suspended, but they were resumed in 2016. However, the council meeting did not give any noticeable results. It is significant that after the transfer of Alexander Grushko from Brussels to Moscow at the beginning of 2018, the post of the Russian representative to NATO remained vacant.
Who will the gap between NATO and the Russian Federation hurt more?
How will relations between NATO and Russia develop further? Oana Lungescu said that the alliance regrets the steps taken by Russia. “NATO’s policy towards Russia remains consistent. We have strengthened our deterrence and defense in response to Russia’s aggressive actions, and at the same time remain open to dialogue, including within the NATO-Russia Council,” she added.
Jamie Shea, an expert at the Friends of Europe think tank, who previously worked at NATO, said in an interview with DW that Russia’s decision would change little “in the current deplorable state of political relations between NATO and Russia.”
William Alberk, an expert at the Berlin office of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), who previously worked as director of the NATO center for arms control, does not quite agree with this. In a comment to DW, he pointed to the importance of the military liaison mission in Moscow: “It is a good communication channel to reduce risks and prevent misunderstandings.”
He sees the key importance of this mission in the fact that it was a “daily source of information” about NATO for the Russian Federation, because there were professionals who spoke Russian and maintained good working relations with their Russian counterparts. Who will be “hurt” by the decision of the Russian Foreign Ministry? Alberk replies: “In the long run, this will hurt Russia more.”
See also:
.