The myth that won’t die: blaming NATO for Russia’s war
In the murky landscape of disinformation, few narratives have proven as stubbornly persistent as the claim that NATO expansion provoked Russia(opens in a new tab) into invading Ukraine.
This myth, recycled and rebranded by Kremlin apologists, shifts blame for Russia’s aggression onto the West – ignoring history and facts. It’s time to call this narrative what it is: a convenient distortion designed to justify an unjustifiable war.
Myth 1: “Russia was provoked. NATO broke a promise”
One of the most common myths in pro-Kremlin rhetoric is that NATO promised not to expand “one inch eastward” after the Cold War. But there is no evidence of any formal agreement to that effect. Multiple Western leaders and declassified documents confirm that while there were discussions about NATO’s position in Germany during reunification, no binding or global commitment was made to freeze the alliance’s borders indefinitely.
And here’s a crucial point: if Russia truly wanted such a guarantee, it knows full well how international diplomacy works. It would have pushed for a treaty, a formal accord, or at the very least, a publicly documented commitment. But that never happened – because no such promise was ever officially made nor sought. Even Mikhail Gorbachev(opens in a new tab), the Soviet leader at that time, confirmed that there was no agreement or promise to not enlarge NATO. In diplomacy, if there’s no treaty, no signed agreement, and no public declaration, then there is no binding promise. Russia understands this. It’s not ignorance – it’s deliberate revisionism by Putin.
More importantly, sovereign nations in Eastern Europe wanted to join NATO – not because NATO sought to encircle Russia, but because these countries had endured decades of Soviet occupation and invasions, and were determined never to return to that subjugation. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania – these were not pawns being played by Washington. They were democracies making strategic choices for their security. To suggest otherwise is to deny them agency and ignore their history and sovereignty.
Myth 2: “Ukraine was about to join NATO. Russia had no choice”
Despite repeated claims, Ukraine(opens in a new tab) was not on the verge of joining NATO in early 2022. While Ukraine had long expressed interest(opens in a new tab) in membership, there was no formal invitation, no fast-track process. The idea that NATO membership for Ukraine was imminent is more a Kremlin fiction than fact. It was a distant possibility, not a current policy.
Russia’s ultimatum in December 2021(opens in a new tab) for a guarantee that Ukraine would never join NATO was never a genuine diplomatic offer – it was a pretext. Demanding that NATO not only bar Ukraine forever but also roll back its presence from all countries that joined after 1997, erasing decades of sovereign decisions by Eastern European states, was not a negotiation – it was an impossible demand. Putin knew NATO could never accept it without abandoning its core principles and the security of its members. The ultimatum was meant to be rejected. It was a setup, not a diplomatic effort (as we’ve outlined here).
And perhaps the clearest evidence that NATO wasn’t the real reason for the invasion? Putin’s own words. In his February 2022 speech(opens in a new tab) just before the invasion, he hardly focused on NATO at all. Instead, he questioned Ukraine’s very right to exist as an independent state – claiming it was “created by Lenin” and should be part of Russia. That rhetoric points not to defensive concerns, but to imperial ambition.
If Russia truly feared Ukraine joining NATO, launching a full-scale invasion is perhaps the most effective way to guarantee closer Western alignment and support. The war did not stop NATO from getting closer to Ukraine – it accelerated that process. That’s not fear, that’s a gamble rooted in different ambitions.
Myth 3: “Russia feared NATO on its border”
The idea that Russia invaded Ukraine out of fear of NATO is contradicted by its own actions. If Moscow truly saw NATO as an immediate threat, believing NATO was planning to use Ukraine as a launch pad for a war against Russia, it would likely have calculated a more cautious approach, particularly given NATO’s military power.
In fact, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 demonstrates the opposite: a calculated confidence that NATO would not intervene directly, and that NATO was not seeking a war with Russia. And that calculation was correct. NATO, despite its military power, repeatedly emphasised(opens in a new tab) that it would not send troops into Ukraine or engage Russian forces directly. Putin knew this – and he gambled accordingly.
If the Kremlin genuinely feared NATO, it would not have provoked a scenario that could bring NATO’s attention and weaponry even closer. But it did – because the real motivation wasn’t fear of NATO. It was a desire to reassert control over Ukraine and prevent its general westward ambitions.
Myth 4: “There was a coup in Ukraine in 2014, led by the West”
This tired trope tries to erase the will of the Ukrainian people, who took to the streets in 2013–2014 demanding accountability, reform, and an end to corrupt Russian-backed leadership. The Revolution of Dignity was not orchestrated by the CIA or NATO, it was sparked by President Yanukovych’s abrupt rejection of a popular free trade and association agreement(opens in a new tab) with the EU and his violent crackdown on protesters.
The Kremlin frames this democratic uprising as a Western-led coup because it cannot acknowledge that its neighbours might choose a different path – one that doesn’t revolve around Moscow. For authoritarian regimes, the power of free people is always the enemy.
What the myth ignores
To truly understand this war, look not at NATO’s decisions, but at Vladimir Putin’s own words. In his infamous July 2021 essay(opens in a new tab) and February 2022 speech(opens in a new tab), Putin dismissed Ukrainian sovereignty and framed the country as a historical part of Russia. His motivations aren’t defensive – they’re imperial. The invasion was about reasserting control over a former Soviet republic, crushing a thriving democracy on Russia’s border, and signalling to other post-Soviet states that turning westward comes with consequences.
Putin doesn’t fear NATO. He fears democracy. He fears that Russia’s democratic neighbours, previously occupied by Moscow, would prove Russians could live freely without oligarchs and authoritarianism too. That’s the real threat to the Kremlin’s power.
NATO is the excuse, not the cause
Blaming NATO for Russia’s war is a narrative of convenience, not credibility. It absolves the aggressor, ignores the agency of smaller nations, and flips the script on decades of post-Cold War history. It’s a myth that serves only one master: the Kremlin.
Don’t be deceived. Ukraine did not “provoke” Russia any more than a burglar is provoked by a house installing a lock. This war is not about broken promises or misunderstood red lines. It’s about power, control, and the refusal to let others live freely outside of Moscow’s grasp.
The sooner we bury this myth, the sooner we can focus on holding the right party accountable – and standing up for the truth.
Also spotted on EUvsDisinfo’s radar this week:
- Pro-Kremlin outlets are once again pushing the baseless claim that a so-called “Deep State(opens in a new tab)” is pulling the strings in Europe, allegedly forcing it to continue the war in Ukraine. This narrative, rooted in long-debunked conspiracy theories, conveniently ignores the fact that the war is the result of Russia’s unprovoked full-scale invasion. There’s no evidence of shadowy elites dictating European policy – just another attempt to delegitimise Western democracies and portray the EU as a warmonger, while deflecting attention from Russia’s aggression.
- Following a deadly Russian missile attack(opens in a new tab) on Sumy that killed 35 civilians(opens in a new tab) and injured over 100 during a religious celebration, disinformation actors are trying to spin the narrative by suggesting that Ukrainians are blaming their own president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. These claims are not supported by credible sources and rely on cherry-picked or fabricated social media posts. In contrast, real reports(opens in a new tab) from the ground show public outrage(opens in a new tab) directed at Russia for the strike, not at Ukraine’s leadership. Russia’s justification of “military targets” in civilian areas remains unproven – while the civilian death toll speaks volumes.
- Another week, another twist in the Kremlin playbook – this time accusing the EU of encouraging censorship in Moldova. The story hinges on a temporary 60-day suspension(opens in a new tab) of the TVC21 channel’s license, falsely claiming the EU encouraged the move. In fact, the EU ambassador to Moldova called for clearer justifications and transparency – not censorship. The EU has consistently stood for media freedom and pluralism(opens in a new tab), and this misrepresentation is part of a broader effort to paint European policies as authoritarian.