■1997年のアメリカ上院による NATO 拡大容認は悲劇的失敗と G.F.ケナンはみなした(予想した)

■1997年のアメリカ上院による NATO 拡大容認は悲劇的失敗と G.F.ケナンはみなした(予想した)
　この度のロシアによる蛮行は論外であります。しかし、野蛮な軍事侵略をプーチン個人の資質のみに帰するのは誤っており、プーチンの背後には NATO 拡大というアメリカ等による対ロシア敵対行為(1997～今日に至るまで)を憎むロシア人大衆がいることも知らねばならないと私はあえて言います。もちろん、少なからずのロシア人は国内でも国外でもこの度の蛮行を非難してますが、ロシア国内のロシア人の1/3程度は容認しているのではないかと思います。NATO拡大によるロシア封じ込め(まるでソ連に対するそれのような)に怒ってきたロシア国民が過半数はいることを私は疑いません。
2/26に NOTE に記した「ロシアのウクライナへの軍事力行使は、NATO 拡大という西側の失策がもたらした」 https://note.com/sawataishi/n/n358429fc5a60
という愚説の要点は、1991年に NATO の存在理由であるソ連・ワルシャワ条約機構が消滅したのに NATO を解散しなかった過ち、1997年に拡大方針を採用した過ちが、今回の悲劇をもたらしたということでした。プーチンに殺されたジャーナリスト、アンナ・ポリトフスカヤの著作を読むなどにより、プーチンを習キンペイに対するほど嫌悪してる私ですが、今ロシアの蛮行に私達が憤っているからこそ、ロシアがこんなようになってしまった原因はアメリカにあることを知らねばならないと思うのです。

以下に、the New York Timesが公開している1997, 1998, 2022の諸意見を紹介します。

Opinion
A Fateful Error
By George F. Kennan
Feb. 5, 1997
-> https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/05/opinion/a-fateful-error.html

OPINION
THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
This Is Putin’s War. But America and NATO Aren’t Innocent Bystanders.
Feb. 21, 2022
-> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/21/opinion/putin-ukraine-nato.html
/********* 引用開始 ***************/
On May 2, 1998, immediately after the Senate ratified NATO expansion, I called George Kennan, the architect of America’s successful containment of the Soviet Union. Having joined the State Department in 1926 and served as U.S. ambassador to Moscow in 1952, Kennan was arguably America’s greatest expert on Russia. Though 94 at the time and frail of voice, he was sharp of mind when I asked for his opinion of NATO expansion.

I am going to share Kennan’s whole answer:

“I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the founding fathers of this country turn over in their graves.

“We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way. [NATO expansion] was simply a lighthearted action by a Senate that has no real interest in foreign affairs. What bothers me is how superficial and ill informed the whole Senate debate was. I was particularly bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe.

“Don’t people understand? Our differences in the Cold War were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime. And Russia’s democracy is as far advanced, if not farther, as any of these countries we’ve just signed up to defend from Russia. Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then [the NATO expanders] will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are ? but this is just wrong.”
/********* 引用終了 ***************/

Opinion
Foreign Affairs; Now a Word From X
Thomas L. Friedman
By Thomas L. Friedman
May 2, 1998
-> https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html

Opinion
On NATO, How Will Russia React?; Kennan's Warning
May 4, 1998
EUGENE J. CARROLL JR.
Deputy Director
Center for Defense Information
-> https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/04/opinion/l-on-nato-how-will-russia-react-kennan-s-warning-790338.html
/********* 引用開始 ***************/
To the Editor:

Re ''Senate Approves Expansion of NATO by Vote of 80 to 19'' (front page, May 1): Isolation and confrontation by an expanding military alliance are not the way to create a friend and ally. Rather this is the way, in the words of George F. Kennan (Op-Ed, Feb. 5, 1997), ''to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.''

Now that the Senate has acted, those of us who share Mr. Kennan's concern can only cling to the hope that one or more current NATO members will recognize that perpetuating the cold war is unwise and that the best hope for long-term peace and stability in Europe requires including Russia politically, economically and militarily within the European community. The Partnership for Peace and Russian membership in the European Union will do far more to achieve that objective than the confrontational expansion of NATO.
/********* 引用終了 ***************/