The decision may be made within days in Brussels, where the NATO-Russia Council is scheduled to meet on May 10. ABM will most likely stand at the top of the agenda, and Russia also intends to raise the issue of the Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe.
NATO countries have refused to ratify the CFE treaty, demanding that Russia first withdraw from Soviet-era bases in Georgia and Moldova as stipulated by the Istanbul Agreements. Russian President Vladimir Putin has rejected the argument as unsubstantiated, saying that the deployment of conventional forces in Europe is not legally connected with the Istanbul Agreements.
Russia is complying with the CFE provisions, whereas NATO countries have not even ratified it, even though they claim the treaty is the cornerstone of European security.
The planned deployment of elements of the U.S. ballistic missile system in Europe has poured more fuel onto the flames. Some time before the Council meeting, Putin proposed that Russia should unilaterally suspend the implementation of the CFE treaty.
"I propose to discuss the issue at the Russia-NATO Council, and if progress is not reached in negotiations, [we may] consider the possibility of terminating our obligations under the CFE treaty," Putin said.
Washington, Brussels and the whole of Europe apparently considered the statement as Moscow's reaction to the possible deployment of American ballistic missile defense systems close to the Russian border.
French Foreign Ministry spokesman Jean-Batiste Mattei said Paris hoped the CFE and ABM issues would be discussed at the forthcoming NATO-Russia Council, and called for Russia to reconsider its decision regarding the CFE treaty.
Other European politicians expressed their views more radically.
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said the issue of deploying the American ballistic missile shield in Europe should be decided by Europeans, who must not give a third party the right to veto actions by a sovereign state. He also expressed disappointment over Russia's stance on the CFE treaty.
In short, opinions ahead of the NATO-Russia Council meeting vary dramatically, and the only surprising thing is the absence of statements by European politicians on the ratification of the CFE treaty, which they view as the cornerstone of European security.
Their unwillingness to meet Moscow halfway can be explained by the fact that some European countries are flagrantly violating CFE provisions, whereas Russia has fewer weapons in its treaty zone than it is allowed to have. It would make sense for European countries to heed Russia's grievances over the ABM issue.
According to the Kremlin, Washington's arguments that the missile defense system is a shield from Iran and North Korea only "camouflage the system's real goals," which are "Russia and a change of the strategic balance in favor of the Untied States." This is the opinion of General Yury Baluyevsky, Chief of Russia's General Staff, who will represent Russia at the May 10 NATO-Russia Council meeting.
The situation has become more complicated after the heads of two subcommittees in U.S. Congress criticized Washington's plans to deploy the ballistic missile defense system in Europe. Democratic Congressmen asked why the White House had discussed the issue separately with Poland and the Czech Republic instead of raising the issue in NATO, if the system was aimed at protecting Europe as a whole.
Congressmen said they respected the concern of many of their European allies over the planned deployment of the nuclear missile shield contrary to Russia's stance.
So, there are reasonable views on the ABM and CFE issues in the West. But will they be voiced at the Brussels meeting?
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
