As NATO gets stronger, Russia’s version of NATO is falling apart

Sweden joined NATO last month, ending two centuries of neutrality. Its accession comes just shy of NATO’s 75th anniversary. While Russian President Vladimir Putin hoped to fracture NATO and drive the United States from Europe, he has achieved the opposite. Not since the height of the Cold War has NATO been so united, and never before has it been so large. Sweden’s accession is only half the story, however.

For Putin, the problem is not only NATO’s gain but also the Collective Security Treaty Organization’s loss. Established in 2002, Putin saw the institutionalization of the CSTO as the antidote to NATO and a mechanism to assert Russian dominance over many former Soviet republics. The initial members were Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan. Uzbekistan joined in 2006, but left six years later.

Now it may be Armenia’s turn to leave Russia’s orbit. Just two days after Hungarian ratification removed the last obstacle to Sweden’s NATO membership, Armenia signaled readiness to leave the CSTO. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who came to power in 2018 as a result of a people power revolution, suspended participation and described Armenia’s participation in the CSTO as “frozen.”

On Feb. 23, the Kremlin stated that it was seeking clarification from Armenia. Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said there have been no communications between the two countries, and Armenian officials have not officially informed Russia about the decision to suspend their membership. Perhaps the Kremlin is simply seeking to save face, for Armenia’s actions are deliberate.

The Armenian move comes after a months-long Azerbaijani blockade of the Lachin corridor, after Russian peacekeepers failed to intervene to stop Azerbaijan’s takeover of the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region, leading almost 100,000 ethnic Armenians to flee.

Pashinyan explained that Armenia’s change of posture was necessary. Despite Russia’s ironclad commitment to defend the other member states from aggression listed in Article 4 of the CSTO, which is akin to NATO’s Article 5, Russian support never came. Not only had the CSTO failed to provide requested military support, but Armenia’s continued CSTO affiliation also prevented Armenia from purchasing weapons from the West necessary to defend itself.

Russia’s betrayal of Armenia disappointed Yerevan but made sense from Moscow’s perspective. Putin views the CSTO as a tool for exerting control over the post-Soviet region and promoting Kremlin interests rather than a symbiotic relationship. With Russian resources depleted in Ukraine, it considers obligations to other CSTO members inessential. Consequently, countries formerly under Putin’s influence are now reconsidering their strategic posture.

Momentum matters. NATO should capitalize on these developments in the Global South and Russia’s neighborhood,where Putin seeks to expand his influence. NATO remind fence-sitters and those tilting toward Russia — like Belarus, Venezuela, Syria, Serbia and Moscow’s friends in Africa — that Putin is not reliable. With friends like Putin, who needs enemies?

NATO has stopped Putin’s plan to undermine the alliance. Celebrating Sweden’s accession is the end of a chapter, but not the end of a struggle for freedom. Now is time for NATO to expose CSTO as a paper tiger.

Ivana Stradner is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.