Times Of India · published 19 h ago ·
found by searching “NATO kursto karą prieš Rusiją”
NATO To Pay For Ukraine's Peace? Putin Demands NATO Rollback To 1997 Borders
NATO To Pay For Ukraine's Peace? Putin Demands US Military Bloc Rollback To 1997 Borders | Details
What the site found
Not propaganda · agenda: US-Russia talks decide Ukraine's fate
Belief the Pravda network pushes: Russia and the United States should negotiate Ukraine's future without Europe, while Ukraine and the West block peace and threaten Russia.
The video reports, citing the New York Times, that Russia is demanding NATO pull back to its 1997 positions, and includes European officials arguing that Europe must have a seat at the negotiating table and that Russia is the aggressor.
The video says · at 1:11 · quote checked against the transcript
“NATO governments reject that argument, maintaining that sovereign European states have the right to choose their own alliances.”
NATO governments reject that argument, maintaining that sovereign European states have the right to choose their own alliances.
The video reports Russia's demand as attributed reporting, presents NATO's rebuttal, and includes European voices saying Europe should be at the table and that Russia is the aggressor, so it does not distort events toward the Pravda slant of US-Russia deciding Ukraine's fate without Europe.
The Pravda stories it echoes
Closest stories from the Pravda network, by meaning. Each links to the site’s comparison with trusted Lithuanian news.
19 days ago · Sergejus Mardanas: V. Putin in upcoming Ukraine negotiations will likely demand reducing NATO presence in Europe to 1997 levels — The Telegraph
M low
F low
3 verified differences
19 days ago · Jurijus Barančikas: V. Putin will demand NATO withdraw to 1997 borders
M low
F low
3 verified differences
Transcript (en, 341 lines)
0:02 The negotiations may be about ending the
0:04 Ukraine war, but Moscow is putting
0:06 something much bigger on the table.
0:09 Russia is again demanding that NATO roll
0:11 back the military footprint it has built
0:14 across Eastern Europe since the late
0:16 1990s, potentially turning negotiations
0:19 over Ukraine into a fight over Europe's
0:21 entire postcold war security order.
0:24 According to the New York Times, Moscow
0:27 revived the demand during negotiations
0:29 in Abu Dhabi. Moscow wants NATO forces
0:33 pulled back to their 1997 positions,
0:36 effectively returning the alliance's
0:38 military posture to the period before
0:40 its major eastward expansion. The year
0:43 is important. [music] In 1997,
0:46 countries including Poland, Hungary, and
0:49 the Czech Republic had not yet joined
0:51 NATO. Neither had the Baltic states. The
0:54 alliance subsequently expanded deep into
0:57 what had once been Moscow's Soviet era
0:59 sphere of influence. Russia has opposed
1:02 that expansion for years and has
1:04 repeatedly argued that NATO military
1:07 infrastructure moving closer to its
1:08 borders created a direct security
1:11 threat. NATO governments reject that
1:14 argument, maintaining that sovereign
1:16 European states have the right to choose
1:18 their own alliances. But Moscow is now
1:21 trying to put that long-running dispute
1:23 into the terms of an eventual Ukraine
1:25 settlement, and the demands extend
1:28 beyond where NATO troops are stationed.
1:31 Moscow also wants a halt to further NATO
1:33 expansion that would directly affect
1:36 Ukraine's long-term relationship with
1:38 the alliance and potentially constrain
1:40 future enlargement elsewhere. Moscow is
1:44 also seeking an end to western weapons
1:46 supplies to Ukraine. that would strike
1:48 at one of Kev's principal military
1:51 lifelines and would significantly limit
1:53 the ability of European governments to
1:55 continue arming Ukraine after any
1:57 ceasefire.
1:59 Russia's demands would therefore reach
2:01 well beyond Ukraine and into a debate
2:03 that European capitals have only
2:05 recently begun having among themselves.
2:08 Taken together, Moscow's position
2:11 suggests that it does not view a peace
2:13 settlement as simply a question of where
2:15 the Russia Ukraine front line eventually
2:17 stops. Moscow wants the negotiations to
2:20 address what it sees as the underlying
2:23 European security architecture that
2:25 produced the confrontation in the first
2:27 place. The timing adds another layer.
2:30 The demands have emerged ahead of next
2:32 week's expected meeting between Donald
2:34 Trump and Vladimir Putin in China on the
2:37 sidelines of the Apex summit. That
2:39 raises the possibility that the argument
2:41 over Ukraine could increasingly become
2:44 part of a much larger Trump Putin
2:46 discussion about European security. And
2:49 that is what makes the 1997 demand so
2:53 consequential. Russia is not simply
2:55 asking for territory, a ceasefire, or
2:58 limits on Ukraine's military. It is
3:01 reopening the question of how far NATO
3:03 should extend, where its forces should
3:05 operate, and what kind of military
3:08 protection Europe should be allowed to
3:09 build around itself. If those demands
3:12 remain on the table, then negotiating an
3:15 end to the Ukraine war will also mean
3:17 confronting a dispute that predates the
3:19 war itself. whether Europe's postcold
3:22 war security map is permanent or whether
3:25 Moscow can force parts of it back into
3:27 negotiation.
3:31 >> More important things like peace peace
3:33 in Ukraine and and the discussions about
3:36 uh Europe's and Europe's role in uh in
3:38 negotiations. I think uh we as Europe
3:43 have to grow some bigger balls because
3:46 we are bigger in size. We're bigger in
3:49 uh I mean in military might.
3:50 >> Uh I know that the Russians don't want
3:52 me but uh you know uh do we have a say
3:56 uh who is representing Russia? No, we
3:59 don't. And uh really I mean we have to
4:01 have a strong team and I'm ready to do
4:04 this work
4:06 >> today. the importance is about AI,
4:09 discussions about AI, but uh uh there's
4:11 so much uh more important things like
4:13 peace peace in Ukraine and and the
4:16 discussions about uh Europe's and
4:18 Europe's role in uh in negotiations. I
4:20 think uh we as Europe have to grow some
4:25 bigger balls because we are bigger in
4:28 size. We're bigger in uh in I mean in
4:31 military might in all the economic
4:33 aspects. Look where is Russia? Russia is
4:35 uh not capable of even uh taking such a
4:39 such a in size smaller in in population
4:43 smaller uh power as Ukraine which is
4:45 showing a great great spirit and
4:47 fighting back fifth year and in
4:50 discussions Russia is raising uh the
4:53 points what what we have to accept sorry
4:56 that's the aggressor which is losing on
4:58 the front line uh we should be raising
5:00 our expectations what has to be done in
5:03 terms of Ukraine security. So I think
5:05 that's uh that's the position we should
5:06 be we should be stronger in in pointing
5:08 out that uh we are the guarantee for the
5:11 future security. It is our geographical
5:14 area what is uh in the future with
5:16 Ukraine and and Europe. So I think
5:18 that's that should be the position in
5:20 the discussions.
5:21 >> What do you say to those member states
5:23 who don't want you to be the one
5:24 negotiating?
5:26 Well, uh, all the member states actually
5:29 agreed that I'm the one who is
5:31 representing Europe in foreign and
5:33 security policy. So, um, I mean that was
5:36 in 2024 when it was clear um that, uh,
5:40 you know, this is going to be the case.
5:42 Uh, I know that the Russians don't want
5:44 me, but uh, you know, uh, do we have a
5:47 say uh, who is representing Russia? No,
5:50 we don't. And, uh, really, I mean, we
5:52 have to have a strong team. And I'm
5:55 ready to do this work with the foreign
5:56 ministers. Uh we meet every uh every
5:59 month. We have these formats already in
6:01 place and and frankly I think that
6:03 leaders have so much on their plate. uh
6:06 we should you really use the foreign
6:08 ministers and this format more to
6:10 actually you know um the way you
6:13 negotiate first you know you put
6:15 together the maximum demands then you
6:17 come together where are where is our
6:19 fallback position where we can
6:21 compromise and of course I'm bound uh
6:24 with what the member states say I mean
6:26 I'm not representing myself I'm
6:27 representing 27 like I have done already
6:31 two years what we saw um was Jared
6:34 Kushner finally ly admitting what I said
6:37 already one and a half years ago that
6:39 for any deal uh between uh Russia and
6:43 Ukraine uh for this implementation you
6:45 also need the Europeans. So that's why
6:47 the Europeans have to be at the table.
6:50 But I hope that uh we are just not at
6:52 the table but we are actually also uh
6:55 really uh um uh influencing the outcome
6:58 of these negotiations. And there the
7:01 most important is that we keep uh to our
7:04 agreement that first the ceasefire um
7:07 then you know peace agreement and then
7:09 any kind of other uh talks um and what
7:12 what comes after. stated that you
7:15 already have the mandate for doing this.
7:17 So logistically, um it's not to a
7:21 question to insult any work you've
7:22 already been doing, but this we talk
7:24 about peace process. When does Europe
7:27 start doing like Jared for sure and
7:30 start taking that level of initiative?
7:32 >> Uh well um well, we have institutions in
7:36 place. So we can't just send any person
7:39 that has no institutional role like the
7:41 Americans are sending. So uh clearly we
7:44 should not copy the same patterns and
7:46 that is why we are also discussing uh
7:49 what I've done uh so far is to prepare
7:52 the negotiations. So I mean the leaders
7:55 can decide whoever is representing but I
7:57 think it is important the substance uh
8:00 where this is uh really uh coming from
8:03 what is the mandate and and to work from
8:06 there. So I can do the preparation work.
8:08 Uh really I think it's important the
8:11 substance um to see clearly what is at
8:13 stake.
8:13 >> Why why do you think um the Russians
8:16 don't don't want you as a negotiator? Do
8:19 you think it's because you're from
8:20 Eastern Europe?
8:22 >> They don't want anybody strong on the
8:24 other side because they want to push the
8:26 through their maximum demands like they
8:28 have always done because like the
8:30 foreign minister Kromokco said that
8:33 their tactics is very clear. I mean at
8:35 first you present threats and
8:36 ultimatums. You use force and then you
8:39 will just wait because there will always
8:41 be people in the west who will offer you
8:43 something you didn't have before
8:45 >> and most importantly uh we need peace in
8:48 Ukraine. Uh and any further funds should
8:51 primarily go toward Ukraine's
8:53 reconstruction. Uh we need a sort of uh
8:56 Marshall plan. So that's crucial and uh
9:00 I hope all the leaders will agree that
9:01 we need that peace because sometimes I
9:04 feel like uh like they've gotten used to
9:06 the war and that it's normal. To me it's
9:08 not normal.
9:10 >> Mr. Prime Minister, were you able to
9:11 meet with the president of Ukraine in
9:13 person yesterday? Could you please tell
9:14 us how that meeting went and what
9:15 specific topics you two discussed
9:17 together?
9:18 Yes, I have I've had a discussion with
9:21 President Zalinski uh for one regarding
9:24 the Ukrainian side's keen interest in
9:27 the L39NG training aircraft.
9:31 Um I just want to emphasize that uh this
9:35 is actually a sale by a private company
9:38 which uh Ukraine will pay for as usual.
9:41 Uh that means there's no money from our
9:44 budget involved.
9:46 uh the president is interested in
9:48 another uh 14 aircraft. So that was the
9:51 first piece of information plus they're
9:53 offering us a drone initiative.
9:57 Uh regarding our current uh military
9:59 affairs, I need to know if any formal
10:02 negotiations have started yet. I firmly
10:05 believe Ukrainians are the world's best
10:07 in drone warfare and advanced
10:09 technology. so we can receive a
10:12 comprehensive proposal on how this could
10:14 function in practice. Well, and then we
10:17 also talked about uh Carl Havlichek's uh
10:20 trip to Ukraine which actually ended uh
10:23 or was still ongoing at the time of my
10:25 meeting. There are various uh various
10:28 possibilities for cooperation. Of
10:30 course, uh the Ukrainian side is
10:32 interested in our turbines uh from the
10:35 company Shikod JS because they'll
10:37 obviously be rebuilding their energy
10:39 sector. uh regarding our meeting today
10:42 um um and the ongoing support for
10:44 Ukraine, uh Chancellor Schultz is
10:45 looking to tie the Ukraine support
10:46 package to this issue as well,
10:47 specifically to the MFM, which is the
10:49 long-term European budget. Uh what is
10:50 your personal perspective on the letter
10:51 that he recently sent?
10:53 >> We've been sitting up this morning
10:54 discussing it. There's a group of
10:55 countries that are
10:58 they they're no longer called the frugal
11:00 ones, but those of us who simply think
11:02 uh a budget shouldn't cost too much. We
11:04 sat down this morning, including the
11:07 support for Ukraine.
11:09 I personally believe that what the
11:10 German chancellor is currently proposing
11:12 is absolutely and completely
11:13 unacceptable. A significant number of
11:15 these countries simply want to opt out
11:17 of the process as they like to put it.
11:18 In other words, they are looking to stay
11:20 entirely clear of um providing any
11:22 financial support for Ukraine. That is a
11:24 completely unacceptable stance to take,
11:26 not least because those very same
11:28 countries are often net recipients of
11:29 the European Union budget as a whole. So
11:32 Ukraine support within the framework of
11:34 all budget issues is absolutely crucial
11:36 for Germany, but also for us. I sense
11:38 there's broad agreement on on our side
11:40 about this.
11:42 >> Do you not see any risk that this might
11:43 turn into a dangerous game? I mean, if
11:45 these budget negotiations continue to
11:47 drag on, it implies that the support for
11:49 Ukraine will be further delayed.
11:51 >> Uh there are many risks in this right
11:54 now. There are many risks in this, but
11:56 clearly support for Ukraine is of an
11:58 almost existential nature for for for
12:01 all of Europe. It's important to be able
12:03 to make decisions, but then those
12:05 decisions must also include those kinds
12:07 of resources.
12:09 Entering into a budget decision now that
12:11 involves increases for so many other
12:13 things, very large increases in spending
12:15 for those of us who are already net
12:17 contributors is completely unacceptable.
12:19 And that's why we together with Germany
12:21 have put our foot down firmly. Those
12:23 countries that now want to avoid paying
12:25 for Ukraine, we won't accept that. Um,
12:28 regarding the question of who is going
12:30 to represent Europe, I feel that the
12:31 whole discussion is still slightly
12:34 it is quite uh overstated honestly to
12:36 protect the interests of Europe is quite
12:38 obviously a vital matter. Some of these
12:41 are strictly matters of uh European
12:44 Union interest financing or the future
12:47 membership of Ukraine should be
12:49 represented by EU institutions.
12:52 Naturally, some of these discussions
12:54 must include major nations like France
12:57 and Germany. I also appreciate the
13:00 active participation of both Italy and
13:03 Poland.
13:04 But uh um you must not forget that the
13:06 European Union is important but Europe
13:07 is significantly larger than the EU. So
13:10 so UK at least needs to be included
13:13 also. So I for me this E3 format has
13:16 been pretty uncomplicated. But E5 is
13:19 also very kind of legitimate to me plus
13:22 the EU institutions. So I I'm quite
13:25 flexible on that. I think what we
13:27 actually say is more important than the
13:29 exact configuration of the people in the
13:32 room.
Judged by claude-sonnet-5.5-eu on 2026-11-14 15:18 UTC. A flag means “worth a look”; a person decides.