Copernicus
Industrial Grade Linguist
Agree that eastern European countries wanted Nato to become "richer". But it's deeper than that. They want to be able to control their own country. They don't want to be ruled by outsiders who will "disappear" them in the middle of the night if they say something rash. They want partners who will negotiate with them in trade; not "partners" who will dictate to them their terms. Eastern Europe turned to the west because they are tired of being bullied by Russia. Yes joining NATO will make them richer. But joining NATO also ensures that they can rule themselves. The countries not in NATO are either being destroyed (Ukraine) or will soon be taken over by Russia (Moltova, Belarus). Russia made its own bed in Europe. They are not wanted...NATO expanded in part because of the intent for some nations to get richer. Putin wants to redraw the map to make Russia bigger... not better.Revealed: Leaked document shows how Russia plans to take over Belarus
The document, written for Putin’s Presidential Administration, envisages the total incorporation of Belarus into a “Union State” with Russia by 2030.news.yahoo.comA leaked internal strategy document from Vladimir Putin’s executive office and obtained by Yahoo News lays out a detailed plan on how Russia plans to take full control over neighboring Belarus in the next decade under the pretext of a merger between the two countries. The document outlines in granular detail a creeping annexation by political, economic and military means of an independent but illiberal European nation by Russia, which is an active state of war in its bid to conquer Ukraine through overwhelming force.
“Russia’s goals with regards to Belarus are the same as with Ukraine,” Michael Carpenter, the U.S. ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, told Yahoo News. “Only in Belarus, it relies on coercion rather than war. Its end goal is still wholesale incorporation.”
According to the document, issued in fall 2021, the end goal is the formation of a so-called Union State of Russia and Belarus by no later than 2030. Everything involved in the merger of the two countries has been considered, including the “harmonization” of Belarusian laws with those of the Russian Federation; a “coordinated foreign and defense policy” and “trade and economic cooperation … on the basis of the priority” of Russian interests; and “ensuring the predominant influence of the Russian Federation in the socio-political, trade-economic, scientific-educational and cultural-information spheres.”
Not surprising, but still sad. It underscores what Putin's plan has been all along--a restoration of the Russian Empire, to the extent that it is possible. He gave new life to NATO, whose purpose is to defend Europe against Russian expansionism. It isn't about economics, because that was going in a favorable direction for Russia before the invasion. Nor is it about NATO threatening Russia, since NATO's purpose was being seriously questioned by many of its members before the invasion. After the invasion, NATO expanded, because those neutral governments in the area realized that NATO still had relevance and purpose in the modern world. Now it is just Putin's Russia engaging in naked aggression.
I'm not sure what the talk of NATO becoming "richer" is about. They expanded to increase their operating budget? Upgrade their weapons to fancier models? The alliance existed as a bulwark against Soviet expansionism in Europe, and its reason for being was very much in question after the Soviet Union broke up. The Cold War was over. Eastern European countries still feared Russian expansionism, so they rushed to join NATO for the reasons you give--to ensure their independence from a possible resurgence of Russian imperial expansion. That did not seem a very realistic fear until Putin decided to actually invade Ukraine and seize Crimea and portions of eastern Ukraine. So I very much agree with most of your post, but I don't see the expansion of NATO as having anything to do with NATO countries wanting the alliance itself to become richer. Rather, I think many would have preferred to rid themselves of the economic burden of maintaining it. The new countries joining it weren't bringing along bags of money to throw into the NATO treasury. They were looking for richer nations to supply most of the necessary funding.