This opinion was voiced by Alexei Makarkin, head of the analytical department at the Political Technologies Center, and published in the Wednesday edition of the Russian daily Gazeta.
The newspaper asked a number of leading Russian political experts to comment on the admission of seven new members to NATO.
"At present the expansion does not pose a real threat: there is a permanent dialogue within the traditional mechanisms of interaction, there are no deadlock issues, agreement and compromise are reached in all matters. Moreover, it is necessary to unite with NATO in a certain coalition but not now, and not by joining the military union. Right now it has no time for us, digesting the newly admitted member states, with Albania, Macedonia, Croatia and Ukraine already queued up. If we solve problems that cause tension in Russia, such as deployment of NATO troops at our borders, further integration will be plausible," Makarkin believes.
Mark Urnov, head of the Expertiza foundation, says, "In my opinion, the current NATO expansion is dangerous for Russia to the extent to which we are going to stay in confrontation with Europe and the United States. If we are going to cooperate with them, we should move in the corresponding direction".
Dmitry Oreshkin, head of the Merkator analytic group, commented as follows, "There is no asking whether Russia will cooperate with NATO. It will have to, there is no getting away from it. We should, however, give a thought to another thing: why are the countries that used to be in Russia's influence zone so willing to leave for the NATO? Is there our blame in it? Now there is no talk about confrontation with the West in our foreign policy. There is just a certain discontent on some issues, which is removed in negotiations, nothing more".
Olga Kryshtanovskaya, director of the Applied Policies Institute, is of a different opinion. Deployment of missiles at the Russian borders would pose a threat to the country, she maintains. Yet if Moscow wants a rapprochement with the EU, "Russia's confrontation with NATO should fade".
Alexei Malashenko, expert at the Moscow Carnegie Foundation, is more categorical in his assessment: "No matter how much 'young blood' is added to NATO, it is still a heritage of the Cold War. The fact that all East Europe has joined the NATO can be understood psychologically: they still fear the lead monster the Soviet Union used to be. But this state no longer exists". Islamic radicalism is now more dangerous for Europe than Russian tanks, he pointed out.
"NATO's expansion is clearly harmful for Russia. It is not because NATO troops will be deployed at its borders, but because it gives rise to radical Russian nationalists". It is also psychology, not politics, but it defines public mentality, contains healthy political processes and distances Russia from Europe, the analyst explains.
