Putin and the 2007 Munich Security Conference: How the West ignored the warnings of Putin on Ukraine

Date: July 2023

Sixteen years ago on the 10th February 2007, the President of Russia Vladimir Putin delivered a monumental address at the 2007 Munich Security Conference which was instantly interpreted “as the harshest-ever manifesto since the Cold War era”. 

The landmark speech ignored by the West at the time was a turning point for Putin to publicly critique the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States, and a tipping point in Russia-NATO relations with disastrous consequences which we are now seeing in Ukraine. Despite Putin’s public criticism, Putin did not seek confrontation with NATO and the US but called for a new partnership.

The objective of this brief paper is to dissect Putin’s speech at Munich and analyse its impact in the broader context of Russia-Ukraine-NATO-US relations.

Putin’s Universal Concept of International Security

Putin referred to a universal concept of international security in the interests of all nation states where dialogue is needed:

“It is well known that international security comprises much more than issues relating to military and political stability. It involves the stability of the global economy, overcoming poverty, economic security and developing a dialogue between civilisations. This universal, indivisible character of security is expressed as the basic principle that “security for one is security for all”. 

According to Putin, any violation of Russia’s national security would be a breach for international security exemplifying this with a direct quote from Franklin D. Roosevelt during the first few days of the Second World War: “When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger.”

Putin’s critiques of a Unipolar world and why this is dangerous for global security 

Putin was critical of a world in which “there is one master, one sovereign” with the hypocrisy of the West when preaching “democracy”. 

“… It refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making. It is a world in which there is one master, one sovereign. 

And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.

And this certainly has nothing in common with democracy. Because, as you know, democracy is the power of the majority in light of the interests and opinions of the minority.

Incidentally, Russia - we - are constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves.”

For Putin and Russians, a unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world. Putin provided examples in the 2007 Munich speech of unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions which have not resolved any conflicts. 

The 2007 Munich Security Conference was a pivotal moment as it was the first time since the end of the end of the Soviet Union in which the United States was challenged: 

“I am convinced that we have reached that decisive moment when we must seriously think about the architecture of global security”. 

The world has seen the shift of global power and global commerce from West to East, from a declining Europe to an emerging Asia, from the 20th century hegemony United States to the 21st century superpower China. This is not a battle of ideological or moral considerations, it is a matter of realpolitik. 

In 2007, Putin saw the emergence of China, India and the broader expansion of BRIC countries establishing a multipolar world order and creating a multicurrency regime in the international financial system. 

Putin’s warnings to the West on Ukraine and the current state of affairs in the Russia-Ukraine war

President Putin argued the further easterly expansion of NATO into Ukraine is - and continues to be - an existential threat to Russia, a legitimate security concern to Russia’s national security, and a serious provocation of Russia’s national interest. 

The Austrian Treaty of 1955 would have been a viable position as neutrality of Ukraine is a major stabilising force not only to Russia but to Europe. 

“…Simultaneously the so-called flexible frontline American bases with up to five thousand men in each. It turns out that NATO has put its frontline forces on our borders, and we continue to strictly fulfil the treaty obligations and do not react to these actions at all.

…NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust..

And now they are trying to impose new dividing lines and walls on us – these walls may be virtual but they are nevertheless dividing, ones that cut through our continent..”

The 2007 Munich Security Conference, the 2015 Minsk II Peace Agreement, the 2021 NATO Brussels Summit Communique have demonstrated the Russia-Ukraine war was certainly avoidable, unnecessary and illegitimate. 

The recent NATO Summit held in Vilnius, Lithuania on 11th July 2023, the 31-member countries agreed bringing Ukraine closer to NATO. However, what transpired was a failure with no definitive timeline of NATO membership for Ukraine. What is clear now is that Ukraine will never become a member of NATO and NATO will not go into war on behalf of Ukraine now and into the future. 

The Russia-Ukraine war and subsequent human tragedy the world is witnessing has been forewarned over the course of history. The Russian invasion was the culmination of the failure of the US and NATO in their further easterly expansion of Ukraine and this is precisely what Putin warned in 2007 declaring: 

“And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them. 

But I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: “the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee”. Where are these guarantees?”

With the continuation of the armed military conflict and the absence of diplomacy to end the conflict, President Putin’s consistent warning to NATO has fallen on deaf ears to the West. The United States refused to have discussions with Russia - this is similar to the disastrous mistake after the Congress of Vienna in World War I in which Europe and the US excluded the two great powers of Europe: Germany and the Soviet Union which led to the rise of Hitler and Stalin. 

Putin concluded his Munich speech: 

“Russia is a country with a history that spans more than a thousand years and has practically always used the privilege to carry out an independent foreign policy”.  

This has been Putin’s objective since taking the presidency in 1998 to pursue independent Russian foreign policy for Russia’s national security interests which the West refused to listen and failed to understand.   

Andrei Grachev (Russian political commentator and former spokesperson for President Mikhail Gorbachev), aptly described Putin’s speech at the 2007 Munich Security Conference:   

“The West was guilty of arrogance towards Russia at the time of the collapse of the communist bloc, and its true ‘strategic error’ in refusing to create a collective security integrating Russia. The West has now understood Putin’s message.” 

Copyright © 2023 Maria Silos. All rights reserved.