Exposing Russia's Misinformation About NATO: A Defensive Alliance, Not an Aggressor

In February 2022, the world watched in horror as Russian troops crossed the border into Ukraine, launching the largest military invasion on European soil since World War II. Amid the chaos and devastation, the Kremlin’s disinformation machine revved into high gear, spreading false narratives about NATO’s role in the conflict. Russia's state-controlled media and officials, including President Vladimir Putin, argued that NATO’s expansion and military posturing left Moscow no choice but to act. This line of reasoning has been one of the cornerstones of the Russian government’s justifications for its illegal war of aggression, portraying NATO as a direct threat and aggressor. However, a closer look at the facts, as well as the history of NATO-Russian relations, paints a very different picture.

NATO, a defensive military alliance founded in 1949, exists to safeguard the security and sovereignty of its member states. Contrary to the disinformation campaign unleashed by Russia, NATO’s actions in Ukraine and Eastern Europe are reactive rather than proactive. As Ukraine continues to resist Russian aggression with the help of international support, it is crucial to debunk the key myths spread by Moscow to justify its actions. These myths serve not only as a tool for domestic propaganda but also as a way to divide the West and undermine the unity of the NATO alliance.

NATO Is Not at War with Russia in Ukraine

One of the most pernicious myths circulated by the Kremlin is that NATO is actively at war with Russia in Ukraine. This narrative is used to frame Russia’s invasion as a defensive measure against an aggressive NATO, when in fact, NATO is not a participant in the conflict. Jens Stoltenberg, NATO Secretary General, has repeatedly stated that “NATO is not part of the conflict. We are supporting Ukraine’s right to self-defense, but NATO has not deployed combat troops in Ukraine.” Stoltenberg’s position aligns with international law, particularly the United Nations Charter, which explicitly recognizes the right of sovereign nations to defend themselves against aggression.

Ukraine, as a sovereign nation, requested support from NATO allies after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and its subsequent destabilization of eastern Ukraine. However, NATO’s assistance has been limited to military aid, training, and intelligence sharing — all measures that stop short of direct military intervention. The goal is to help Ukraine defend its territorial integrity, not to provoke Russia or expand the war. It is important to note that Article 5 of the NATO treaty, which states that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all, has not been invoked in this conflict, as Ukraine is not a NATO member.

Experts in international relations, including Dr. Alexander Motyl, a professor of political science at Rutgers University, point out that the Kremlin’s narrative about NATO waging war in Ukraine is part of a broader strategy to stoke fears of Western interventionism. “Russia uses this narrative to bolster support at home and to create divisions in the West,” Motyl explains. “But NATO’s actions in supporting Ukraine are consistent with international norms of defense and sovereignty, not aggression.”

The Myth of a Broken Promise: NATO Did Not Agree to Stop Expanding

Another central pillar of Russian disinformation is the claim that NATO broke a promise made after the Cold War that it would not expand eastward. President Vladimir Putin and other Russian officials have repeatedly argued that NATO’s enlargement into Eastern Europe constitutes a betrayal of Western assurances given to Soviet leaders during the reunification of Germany. This myth has been widely circulated in Russia’s state-controlled media and used to justify Moscow’s fears of encirclement. However, historical evidence reveals that no such promise was ever made.

Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, has been clear on this point. In a 2014 interview with Russia Beyond, Gorbachev stated unequivocally, “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn't brought up in those years. I say this with full responsibility. Not a single Eastern European country raised the issue, not even after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist in 1991.” Gorbachev’s statement is supported by declassified diplomatic records that show NATO’s expansion was not a point of discussion in the negotiations that led to German reunification. Instead, NATO’s open-door policy has been in place since the alliance’s founding in 1949, and it is based on the principle that every sovereign nation has the right to choose its security arrangements.

Even President Putin himself has, at times, acknowledged the legitimacy of this principle. In a 2004 interview, Putin remarked, “Any country has the right to secure itself in the way it deems appropriate. It is their sovereign right. If a country wants to join NATO, it can do so, if the organization agrees.” This rare admission highlights a fundamental contradiction in Russia’s disinformation campaign: while the Kremlin publicly decries NATO’s expansion as a threat, it has, on occasion, conceded that sovereign nations are free to choose their alliances.

The idea that NATO "promised" not to expand is also refuted by prominent historians. Mark Kramer, director of the Cold War Studies Project at Harvard University, notes that “there was never any legally binding agreement preventing NATO from admitting new members. NATO’s enlargement has been driven by the desires of countries in Eastern Europe to join the alliance, not by NATO seeking to encircle Russia.” In fact, countries such as Poland, Hungary, and the Baltic states joined NATO voluntarily, seeking protection from the kind of aggression that Russia has now unleashed on Ukraine.

NATO as a Defensive Alliance, Not an Aggressor

Russia has consistently portrayed NATO as an aggressive military force seeking to encircle and destabilize Moscow. This narrative is designed to create fear both within Russia and among neighboring countries. However, the facts show that NATO is a defensive alliance, created to protect its member states from external aggression, not to instigate conflict. NATO’s core purpose is enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which establishes the principle of collective defense: an attack on one member is an attack on all.

While Russia’s propaganda machine claims that NATO is a threat to Russian security, NATO’s actions in Eastern Europe have been entirely defensive in nature. The deployment of multinational battlegroups to Poland and the Baltic states in 2016, for example, was a direct response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its aggressive actions in eastern Ukraine. Before 2014, there were no combat-ready NATO forces stationed in these countries. Even after the increase in NATO’s presence in Eastern Europe, the alliance’s posture remains one of deterrence, not aggression.

NATO’s Secretary General has consistently emphasized the defensive nature of the alliance. “We do not seek confrontation with Russia, and we pose no threat to Russia. NATO is a defensive alliance,” Stoltenberg said in 2022. Indeed, NATO’s strategic posture has always been to prevent conflict rather than provoke it. Even during the Cold War, NATO's focus was on maintaining the balance of power in Europe through deterrence, not through offensive military action.

Dr. John Deni, a research professor at the U.S. Army War College, further explains that NATO’s deployments in Eastern Europe serve as a “tripwire force,” designed to deter Russian aggression by signaling the alliance’s commitment to defending its members. “The goal is to prevent Russia from miscalculating and thinking it could attack a NATO member without consequences,” Deni argues. “This is about preventing war, not starting one.”

NATO’s Open Door Policy and Ukraine’s Right to Choose

One of the most contentious issues in the current conflict is Ukraine’s potential membership in NATO. Russia has long insisted that Ukraine’s desire to join the alliance is a direct threat to its security, and it has used this as a justification for its invasion. However, NATO’s open-door policy, which allows any European country to apply for membership if it meets the necessary criteria, is based on the principle of national sovereignty. Every nation has the right to determine its own security arrangements, free from external interference.

At the 2008 Bucharest Summit, NATO declared that Ukraine would one day become a member of the alliance, a commitment that was reaffirmed at the 2023 Vilnius Summit. While Ukraine’s accession to NATO has been complicated by the ongoing war and the need for further political and military reforms, NATO has made it clear that the door remains open. In Vilnius, NATO leaders agreed to remove the requirement for a Membership Action Plan, effectively streamlining the process for Ukraine’s future membership.

Ukraine’s desire to join NATO is rooted in its need for security guarantees in the face of Russian aggression. Since 2014, when Russia illegally annexed Crimea and began supporting separatist movements in eastern Ukraine, Kyiv has sought closer ties with the West as a means of ensuring its survival as an independent state. NATO’s support for Ukraine, including military aid and training, has helped the country resist Russian aggression, but it has not involved direct NATO intervention.

In response to Russia’s claims that NATO is encroaching on its sphere of influence, Fiona Hill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, argues that “Ukraine’s desire to join NATO is not about threatening Russia. It’s about protecting itself from Russia. Ukraine has been invaded, annexed, and destabilized by Russia. NATO is a defensive alliance, and Ukraine sees NATO as a means of ensuring its future security.”

Russia’s Fear of Encirclement Is a Myth

One of the most frequently cited justifications for Russia’s aggressive posture is the idea that NATO is “encircling” Russia. This narrative has been used to explain Moscow’s military interventions in Georgia, Crimea, and now Ukraine, with Russian officials claiming that NATO’s expansion leaves them with no choice but to act. However, this narrative falls apart when examined against the facts.

Geographically, Russia is the largest country in the world, spanning 11 time zones and sharing borders with only a few NATO member states. Even after Finland’s accession to NATO in 2023, only about 11% of Russia’s vast land border is shared with NATO countries. The idea that NATO is encircling Russia is not only implausible but also deeply misleading. As NATO’s former Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller points out, “It’s hard to encircle a country with 11 time zones. The narrative of encirclement is more about Russia’s historical paranoia than any real threat from NATO.”

Moreover, NATO’s presence in Eastern Europe has been shaped by the requests of its member states, particularly those with historical experiences of Russian domination. Countries like Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania joined NATO to ensure their security against potential Russian aggression. NATO did not expand eastward by design, but rather in response to the aspirations of former Soviet states that sought to align themselves with the West and protect their sovereignty.

NATO’s Out-of-Area Operations Are Legitimate and Legal

Another myth perpetuated by Russian disinformation is the idea that NATO’s out-of-area operations, such as its interventions in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Libya, prove that it is not a defensive alliance. Critics argue that these operations demonstrate NATO’s willingness to engage in military interventions outside of its core mission. However, all of these operations were conducted with international mandates and were aimed at restoring peace and protecting civilians, not at expanding NATO’s influence.

In the 1990s, NATO intervened in Bosnia and Herzegovina to stop the bloodshed and enforce a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) mandate. The NATO-led air strikes in 1995 played a crucial role in bringing about the Dayton Peace Accords, which ended a conflict that had killed over 100,000 people. Similarly, NATO’s intervention in Kosovo in 1999 followed intense diplomatic efforts, including those involving Russia, to end the ethnic cleansing in the region. NATO’s actions were authorized by the UNSC and were designed to protect civilians from mass atrocities.

In Libya, NATO’s 2011 intervention was conducted under the authority of UNSC Resolutions 1970 and 1973, which were not opposed by Russia. These resolutions authorized the use of force to protect civilians from the Gaddafi regime’s brutal crackdown on protests. NATO’s mission, supported by regional states and members of the Arab League, was aimed at preventing large-scale violence, not at pursuing imperialist goals.

Disinformation in Service of Aggression and Destabilization of Western Democracies

The Kremlin’s disinformation campaign about NATO is not only aimed at justifying its aggression in Ukraine but also plays a pivotal role in destabilizing Western democracies. By portraying NATO as an aggressive and expansionist force, Moscow seeks to sow division within NATO member states, erode public trust in democratic institutions, and weaken the cohesion of the international order that has maintained peace in Europe since the end of World War II. The spread of disinformation—through state-controlled media, social media networks, and online troll farms—has become one of Russia’s most effective tools for undermining the West from within.

The disinformation narrative about NATO fits into a broader Kremlin strategy aimed at destabilizing the liberal democracies that form the backbone of NATO. Russia’s interference in democratic elections, most notably the 2016 U.S. presidential election and the Brexit referendum, is part of a larger effort to fracture the unity of Western nations, stoke internal conflicts, and fuel populist and nationalist movements. These movements often carry anti-NATO and anti-EU sentiments, aligning with Moscow’s interests in weakening the very institutions that pose a threat to its authoritarian model of governance.

The Kremlin has long viewed the unity of Western democracies as a significant challenge to its strategic goals. NATO’s cohesion, in particular, stands as a direct counterbalance to Russian attempts at expanding its influence in Eastern Europe and reasserting dominance over former Soviet states. As Dr. Mark Galeotti, a leading expert on Russian affairs, points out, “Russia sees the democratic West not only as a political and military rival but also as an ideological threat. Putin’s regime thrives on authoritarianism and the suppression of dissent, while NATO and Western democracies represent values of freedom, transparency, and rule of law—values that challenge the very foundations of the Kremlin’s power.”

Disinformation is the Kremlin’s weapon of choice in this ideological battle. By spreading falsehoods about NATO, Russia aims to erode trust in Western institutions and amplify political polarization. The portrayal of NATO as a warmongering alliance feeds into the narratives of far-right and far-left movements in Western democracies, both of which often view NATO with skepticism. This polarization weakens democratic resilience, making societies more vulnerable to external manipulation and internal strife. By exploiting divisions within Western countries, the Kremlin hopes to create an environment where consensus on critical issues—such as military spending, collective defense, and foreign policy—becomes increasingly difficult to achieve.

This destabilization effort has profound implications for global security. A weakened and divided NATO is less able to respond effectively to external threats, whether from Russia or other actors. The erosion of public trust in democratic institutions, fueled by disinformation campaigns, can lead to political paralysis, undermining the ability of Western governments to make swift and decisive policy decisions. As former U.S. Ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder notes, “Russia’s goal is not to destroy NATO through military force but to undermine its cohesion and effectiveness through disinformation and political subversion. If NATO can no longer act with unity, it loses its deterrence power—and that’s exactly what Moscow wants.”

Moreover, by weakening Western democracies, Russia seeks to reshape the global order in ways that are more favorable to its authoritarian model. The rise of illiberal regimes and populist leaders in Europe and beyond often plays into the hands of the Kremlin, which seeks to promote a world where power is centralized, dissent is crushed, and international norms—such as the respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity—are disregarded. In this context, NATO’s defense of democratic values is not only a military commitment but also an ideological one. The alliance represents a counterweight to the authoritarianism that Russia seeks to spread, both through force and through disinformation.

It is no coincidence that Russia has sought to undermine trust in NATO at a time when authoritarianism is on the rise globally. The Kremlin understands that a weakened NATO means a diminished capacity for the West to stand up to authoritarian regimes, whether in Moscow, Beijing, or elsewhere. As the world faces a growing struggle between democratic and authoritarian systems, Russia’s disinformation campaign is part of a broader effort to tilt the balance in favor of the latter. By destabilizing Western democracies, Moscow hopes to create a world in which authoritarian regimes can act with impunity, free from the constraints imposed by international norms and alliances like NATO.

The stakes of this disinformation war are high. If Russia succeeds in weakening NATO and destabilizing Western democracies, the consequences will extend far beyond Europe. The erosion of democratic values and the breakdown of international cooperation would embolden authoritarian regimes around the world, leading to more aggression, more conflict, and less security for all. As Anne Applebaum, a historian and expert on authoritarianism, writes, “The real threat that Russia poses is not just military but ideological. Russia is trying to prove that democracy is weak, that alliances like NATO are fragile, and that authoritarianism is the wave of the future.”

In this context, debunking Russian disinformation about NATO is not just about correcting the historical record—it is about defending the values that underpin the international order. By promoting the truth about NATO’s role as a defensive alliance, committed to peace and stability, the West can push back against the Kremlin’s attempts to rewrite the narrative. As Ukraine continues to fight for its sovereignty, it is crucial that the democratic world stands united in its support—not only to counter Russia’s military aggression but also to resist the disinformation that seeks to divide and destabilize us.

In the end, the battle over NATO’s image is part of a much larger struggle for the future of democracy itself. Russia’s disinformation campaigns are designed to weaken the bonds that unite the democratic world and to erode the principles that have kept Europe at peace for decades. By exposing these lies and reaffirming NATO’s defensive mission, the West can strengthen its resolve to confront not only Russian aggression but also the broader threat posed by authoritarianism in all its forms. As the fight continues, it is imperative that we remain vigilant against disinformation and steadfast in our commitment to the values of democracy, sovereignty, and collective security.