• Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    There were many agreements for NATO not to expand.

    Oh were there?

    That’s interesting, considering how controversial it still is whether oral agreements ever existed in the first place. What isn’t controversial is of course that being oral-only, they can hardly be binding or transactionary. That is to say, the failure was to never transfer these agreements - if they even existed - into writing, bilaterally as that’s how you’d have to do it.