-How does Russia assess the US intention to deploy in Eastern Europe another armored brigade?
Amb.Grushko: We need to have a look at how these intentions will be materialized. We will assess these plans not only in terms of what the US can further deploy on the eastern flank, but together with the measures already taken.
If we speak about a new pattern of force deployment on the eastern periphery of NATO, we witness a qualitative change in the very configuration of this presence and the significant deterioration of the situation in the military sphere.
Today constant rotation of the US forces is carried out in six Eastern European countries, exercises are held on a regular basis with the participation of both the US and European contingents. Naval forces in the Baltics are reinforced. Storages for equipment are created; this equipment is used by rotational units during joint exercises with national contingents. The improvement of infrastructure for new reinforcement troops is taking place. The air military activity has increased along our borders. The number of reconnaissance flights has increased manyfold. There are talks about possible reinforcement of the military presence in the Black Sea region.
All these testify to the fact that the policy of deterrence which was declared on paper, is taking shape now in the form of concrete decisions in the area of military planning. This lays down a long-term negative tendency not only for the regional security, but also for the security of Europe as a whole.
The problem is that in fact nobody knows whether this process will stop. The decision to deploy additional armored brigade is announced at a moment when nothing critical for NATO's interests occurs on the eastern flank.
It becomes more obvious that these military preparations are artificial. There is no direct threat either to Poland, or to the Baltic countries. Nevertheless, the information campaign continues to unfold. We hear absurd horrors that Russia would attack the Baltics if it were not for NATO which undertook measures and deployed forces in this region. We have all the reasons to speak about a serious change in the military situation for the worse.

-Is it fair to say that NATO's actions violate the agreements with Russia, in particular, the Founding Act of 1997?
Amb. Grushko: The additional armored brigade to strengthen the eastern flank contradicts the spirit of the Founding Act. Moreover, NATO tries to claim that all these military efforts fully correspond with the provisions of NATO-Russia Founding Act, according to which NATO committed itself not to deploy additional substantial combat forces on a permanent basis.
We have repeated many times that continuous rotation is in no way different from a permanent deployment. But I would like to note that the two sites of the European segment of the global MD system are under construction. The site in Romania is already operational and will be transferred under NATO command in May. The construction of the facility in Poland is under way. These bases certainly meet the criteria of being substantial and permanent.
-How will the reinforcement of the US forces affect the NATO-Russia cooperation?
Amb. Grushko. It will not have any effect. Cooperation as such does not exist. In April 2014, NATO countries made a decision to suspend all practical cooperation with Russia, all the projects were stopped. Today we do not have any positive agenda with NATO.
We often hear from NATO representatives that they are open for dialogue. The dialogue with the Permanent Mission continues, we have good contacts with the leadership of the Alliance, with all Missions to NATO, but all these contacts can not replace practical cooperation between Russia and NATO, that had been built over the years to ensure security of all NRC members in a number of areas. We worked together on Afghanistan, we made efforts in the fight against terrorism – not only by joint threat assessment and exchange of experience, but also by implementing projects that were designed to avoid tragedies similar to Brussels attacks.
-How can you describe the work within the NATO-Russian Council now?
Amb. Grushko. The work of NATO-Russia Council has not formally interrupted. At our initiative, the Council was convened for an extraordinary meeting in June 2014 in the wake of the punitive operation that the Kiev authorities launched in south-eastern Ukraine. There have been no sessions after that meeting. Work is under way to convene a NRC
-Is it possible to appeal to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE Treaty) in present situation?
Amb. Grushko. The build-up of the US forces is taking place at times when arms control regime in Europe undergoes erosion. The CFE Treaty regime was a cornestone of the European security. It established quantitative restrictions for basic categories of armaments, provided for detailed exchange of information and intrusive inspection regime. In early 1990s, it became clear that the Treaty did not correspond to the new political realities, the talks on its adaptation began. These efforts culminated in signing of an adapted CFE Treaty in 1999. The regime was more responsive to meet the new realities. It provided for concrete mechanisms for engaging political instruments in cases when forces were deployed beyond certain limits. In 2004, Russia ratified this Treaty, but NATO countries delayed its ratification under artificial pretexts. As a result, it did not enter into force. As long as the CFE Treaty lost its touch with the reality, we can state that today the arms control regime in Europe is dead which further complicates the security situation. But this choice has been made by NATO countries themselves.