Summary and Key Points: As of February 2026, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s 20-year obsession with NATO expansion has morphed into what analysts call a “pathological fixation.”
-While the Kremlin justifies its offensive as a defense against a “besieged fortress,” global security experts point out that NATO expansion is a byproduct of democratic growth, not military aggression.
-This “phantom enemy” narrative was famously rejected at the Shangri-La Dialogue, where Asian leaders applauded a rebuttal of the PRC’s pro-Russian stance.
-Ultimately, Putin’s fear is not of tanks, but of prosperous, democratic neighbors, highlighting the failures of his own autocratic rule.
A Million Lives Lost: The Human Cost of Putin’s Pathological Fixation on NATO and the Ukraine War
What is the classic definition of a fanatic? It is an often-asked question today. It’s a relevant inquiry with so many manifestations of military, political, and anti-Western conflicts around the world. The answer: someone who redoubles his effort, having lost sight of his goal.
For Russian President Vladimir Putin, the obsession with the “threat” posed by Ukraine and its increasing cooperation with NATO has been a consistent theme of his rhetoric for almost 20 years. NATO poses an existential threat to Russia, the crux of the former KGB Lt. Col.’s argument. The possibility of its expansion into Ukraine, no matter how unlikely, justified his completely false argument to justify his February 2022 invasion.
The problem with his argument is that NATO expansion is not something that occurs because countries suddenly decide one day to threaten Russia, as Putin claims. Instead, NATO expansion occurs as a by-product of democratic expansion in Eurasia. Once nations have voted in a democracy, they want to make sure no one will try to shoot them back into a dictatorship.
What Putin fears most is not the transatlantic alliance, but the spectre of prosperous European countries on his borders. This would demonstrate to his population what a failure his dictatorship has been.
Eurofighter Typhoon Aircraft NATO. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
A Portuguese Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcon takes off during a Baltic Air Policing Rotation in Estonia.
Baltic Air Policing is a peacetime mission in which NATO Allies deploy fighter jets to cover the airspace of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Image Credit: NATO.
A U.S. Air Force B-52H Stratofortress from the 69th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron flies over the skies of Sweden for their celebration of their acceptance into NATO during Bomber Task Force 25-2, RAF Fairford, United Kingdom, March 11, 2025. These operations demonstrate the ability to rapidly deploy strategic assets in support of global stability. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Chris Hibben)
Vladimir Putin’s rhetoric belies an obsession with a constantly expanding litany of grievances and an extreme adherence to the long-time cherished Russian belief in victimization. He always frames Russia as a perpetual, innocent victim of Western aggression and historical injustice.
This pathological fixation with these grievances has him portraying Russia as a “besieged fortress” to deflect blame for Russia’s criminal acts, sustain domestic support, and justify offensive actions behind a façade of “defending” Russia.
The Russian dictator’s problem is that no one other than his obsequious supporters in Minsk, Beijing, and Pyongyang believes his charge that NATO is what caused the war with Ukraine. “NATO is the excuse and not the reason,” is the most common reaction to Putin’s paranoia about the alliance.
Asian Rejection of Putin’s Grievances
Not just political leaders and populations in Europe reject Putin’s claims. Since the war began, most of the major nations in Asia have also taken the position that his constant whinging about NATO has no basis in reality.
At the 2024 Shangri-La Dialogue Asia-Pacific Security Forum in Singapore, the then-US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin opened the Day One presentation. What happened next showed just how many nations in Asia besides his allies have no regard for Russia’s position on NATO expansion.
When the Q&A segment began, Cao Yanzhong, a PRC People’s Liberation Army PLA Senior Colonel and a researcher at the Institute of War Studies of the PLA’s Academy of Military Sciences, led off with a barbed inquiry.
“The eastern border expansion of NATO has led to the Ukraine crisis,” he began. “What implications do you think the strengthening of the US alliances system in the Asia-Pacific will have on this region’s security and stability?” – implying the US would be the guilty party if a conflict breaks out in Asia.
Before responding to the question, Austin instead told Cao, “I respectfully disagree with your point that the expansion of NATO caused the Ukraine crisis.”
He was then interrupted as the entire hall spontaneously applauded his slap down of the PLA Colonel’s posturing. It bears pointing out that this enthusiastic approval of the US Defense Secretary’s contradiction of the PLA representative was in front of an Asia-Pacific audience, not a European security forum.
Austin then put on record his version of how the war in Ukraine began.
“The Ukraine crisis obviously was caused because [Russian President] Mr. [Vladimir] Putin made a decision to invade his neighbor unlawfully,” continued Austin. “He [Putin] assumed that he could very quickly roll over his neighbor and annex the country – that was two-plus years ago. He has not achieved any of his strategic objectives to this point.”
Obsession With The Phantom Enemy
More than 15 years ago, the English-language Russian publication The Moscow Times began discussing Vladimir Putin’s use of “phantom” or “invented” enemies. The intent was twofold – create a pretense abroad that NATO is an implacable, aggressive enemy of Russia while fostering a siege mentality back home.
The fiction about NATO expansion threatening Russia also disintegrates immediately in the face of how the alliance actually works and of the fact that no action can be taken without a unanimous vote in the NATO Council. It is not a coincidence that many who have worked at NATO headquarters joke that the alliance’s acronym really means “No Action – Talk Only” or “Not After Two O’Clock.”
“It is bad enough that we have people buying into this ‘it’s all NATO’s fault’ argument about the cause of the Ukraine war,” said a former alliance official earlier this year in Warsaw. “What makes it worse is that those who say it are repeating Putin’s talking points and providing moral support for his murder of over a million people in this war.”
About the Author: Reuben F. Johnson
Reuben F. Johnson has thirty-six years of experience analyzing and reporting on foreign weapons systems, defense technologies, and international arms export policy. Johnson is the Director of Research at the Casimir Pulaski Foundation. He is also a survivor of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. He worked for years in the American defense industry as a foreign technology analyst and later as a consultant for the US Department of Defense, the Departments of the Navy and Air Force, and the governments of the United Kingdom and Australia. In 2022-2023, he won two awards in a row for his defense reporting. He holds a bachelor’s degree from DePauw University and a master’s degree from Miami University in Ohio, specializing in Soviet and Russian studies. He lives in Warsaw.