Reply With QuoteAh, Putin is trolling again. Nothing new
Putin calls NATO 'relic of the Cold War'
MOSCOW (AP) — Vladimir Putin on Wednesday called NATO a "relic of the Cold War era," but said Russia should nonetheless continue supporting the alliance's mission in Afghanistan.
Putin, who won a third presidential term last month, defended the government's intention to offer NATO a new logistics facility on Russian territory to facilitate transit of military cargo to and from Afghanistan.
"It's in our national interests to help maintain stability in Afghanistan," Putin told lawmakers who voiced concerns that a NATO facility on Russian soil would threaten its security.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...38ce693f21e7bf"We are interested in the situation there remaining under control, and we don't want our troops to fight on Afghanistan's border with Tajikistan," Putin said. "We need to help them stabilize the situation in Afghanistan, or we will have to do it ourselves."
The title isn't what caught my eye, it is the statement highlighted and the possible implications it could hold. Talks of an alternate supply-line have been in the works for a while, but just thought this was quite a heavy thing to say.
Am I reading too much into it? Or perhaps the wrong thing?
It could be read as an indirect way of arguing for continued or further cooperation between NATO powers and Russia despite recent setbacks.
Ah, Putin is trolling again. Nothing new
Putin signals support for NATO Afghan supply hub
http://www.*******.com/article/2012/...83A0WO20120411President-elect Vladimir Putin on Wednesday called NATO a relic of the Cold War but said he supported letting the alliance use a Russian airport as a supply hub in support of its mission inAfghanistan.
Moscow is studying a request from NATO for use of facilities at an airport in the Volga River city of Ulyanovsk as a transit point for shipments of non-lethal supplies to and from Afghanistan by air, rail and road.
Russia has allowed Afghan-bound NATO transport through its territory since 2009 as an alternative to convoys through Pakistan, which have been subject to militant attacks, but no permanent facility was involved.
"I consider NATO ... a throwback to the Cold War era. It was created at a time when there was a bipolar system of international relations," said Putin, who has frequently criticized the alliance and its eastward expansion.But, in his last address to parliament as prime minister before his return to the Kremlin next month, Putin dismissed fears that NATO's use of the Ulyanovsk facility could represent a threat in Russia's heartland.
"There will be no NATO base there," he said, but only "a hop over pad" for military cargo transit.
"Therefore I assure you that nothing unusual, not corresponding to our national interests, is happening there. On the contrary, everything that is being done in this sphere fully corresponds to the national interests of our people," he told parliament's lower house.
In remarks that suggested Russia does not intend to decrease cooperation in Afghanistan, Putin said "in some cases NATO is playing the role of a stabiliser in global affairs" and included the Afghan mission among such cases.
Moscow's support is crucial to the United States and NATO ahead of the pullout of most combat troops by the end of 2014.
Putin has used vocal anti-Western rhetoric in his presidential campaign, criticizing NATO over its operation in Libya last year and accusing the United States of fomenting protests against his rule. He employed some of that rhetoric on Wednesday, saying that NATO "often sticks its nose where it is not necessary and oversteps its authority".
Russia says it opposes a long-term Western military presence in Afghanistan, but has also expressed fears that the spread of drugs and Islamist militancy toward its borders could worsen if NATO forces leave without first ensuring stability.
"We don't want our soldiers to fight on Tajik-Afghan border," Putin said.
The Soviet Union fought a disastrous war in Afghanistan and Russia ruled out sending troops to aid the U.S.-led invasion after the September 11, 2001, attacks, but Putin - president at the time - offered the use of Russian airspace and other support.
(Editing by Alessandra Rizzo)
Interesting to say the least.
Funny how he wanted membership in this relic of the Cold War...
I agree with the main point though, it is
Originally Posted by IconOfEvi
NATO membership for Russia is an idea that gets floated periodically, but never seems to gain traction. In 1999, then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin expressed Moscow's desire to join the alliance.
http://www.rferl.org/content/Could_NATO_Membership_For_Russia_Break_Impasse_In_European_Security_Debate/1949690.html
Ironic given that Putina himself is a relic of the Cold War.
Wow... Russia a part of NATO?
I'm sorry... I just... I just wet myself thinking about how powerful NATO would be with Russia a member... just... wow.
Beat me to the irony punch.
Powerful? Maybe. More likely it NATO would be crippled by too many disparate world views and aspirations to be useful any longer.
![[WDW]Megaraptor's Avatar](image.php?s=706a868a6c24a56b32660ab06a008670&u=30547&dateline=1171465900 "[WDW]Megaraptor's Avatar")
Yeah, NATO already has too many countries in it seeing as how any member can veto a NATO action. With Russia in NATO nothing would ever get done.
The UN X2 ...
Ditto. I was about to say the same thing..then the page loaded. C.Puffs strikes again.
Except the UN needs only 5 countries to agree while NATO currently needs 28.
I am sorry I did think you were a smart guy? Russia in NATO does not make NATO strong. It would rather make it really really weak.
Technically Putin is correct but the statement as such is irrelevant.
Posting Permissions
