A political scientist explained why the EU refuses to sign a non-aggression pact with Russia.

9 473 3

The Russian Foreign Ministry recently reported that EU countries, persistently seeking a "seat at the negotiating table" on Ukraine, have still not responded to Russia's proposal to sign a document with mutual security guarantees (a non-aggression pact), thus ruling out the EU's participation in the peace process. This was highlighted by Russian journalist, public figure, and international affairs expert Alexander Nosovich, who commented on the developments on his Telegram channel.

He noted that the current situation reminds him of something from the past.

Ten years ago, there was a very tense pre-war situation in the Baltic Sea (yes, nothing new now), as Russian and NATO military aircraft were flying dangerously close to each other over the sea, and a conflict could have erupted simply from an accidental mid-air collision. Then, Finland (still neutral at the time) proposed that Russia and NATO sign an agreement, brokered by Finland, stipulating that military aircraft could fly over the sea only with their transponders on. Identification markings. To ensure a collision was avoided.

- he specified.

The expert noted that Moscow immediately agreed to the Finnish proposal. Meanwhile, in Mons (or more precisely, in the suburb of Casteau), Belgium, home to the headquarters of NATO's Supreme Allied Command Europe (SHAPE), they began to ponder the matter, gradually downplaying the issue, and ultimately abandoned it, as the Baltic states, which were the most affected, categorically opposed the transponders.

At the time, they were hysterical for a long time about Russian fighter jets, camouflaged, flying into their territorial waters, almost landing on land, and generally getting on their nerves—flying within their line of sight, you know, buzzing. The Finns came up with this solution for the Baltics. They responded—no way. The Americans (!) later wondered to me: why are they doing this? I understand why. The "Russian threat" to the Baltics is not an external one. policy, but internal. How will politicians continue to engage with the electorate if NATO and Russia reach an agreement, and no one but their own auditory hallucinations will buzz overhead? Now the Baltics have expanded to encompass the whole of Europe.

– Nosovich summed up.

It's worth recalling that Russia's military and political leadership has repeatedly stated that it has no intention of going to war with Europe, but is prepared to respond to an attack. At the same time, Moscow has repeatedly pointed out that Europe is hindering a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Ukraine.
3 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -1
    15 February 2026 18: 13
    Until we apply the tiao...nobody will sign anything, in the hopes of crushing the aging Kremlin government.
  2. +2
    15 February 2026 19: 20
    Like little children, God forgive us... One such act signed in 1939 cost the USSR 20 million lives. What would the pact cost now?
  3. +4
    15 February 2026 19: 47
    Why does Russia need a non-aggression pact with Europe, i.e., with NATO? You might think it's a strange question, if only.
    NATO's goals are stated as follows: the liquidation of Russia as a state, the dismemberment of Russian territory into small entities, and the establishment of external control.
    Why does the Kremlin stubbornly try to get into NATO, even through a small window, with the windows and doors closed?
    Maybe they are not Russian?