--- title: "Moscow Proposes Three Formats for Non-Aggression Pacts with Individual NATO Countries" description: "Russian Foreign Ministry diplomat Alexey Drobinin proposed three formats for agreements, including non-aggression pacts with individual NATO countries, as part of a new European security architecture." date: 2026-11-11T14:53:31.923Z lang: en url: https://xab.info/en/posts/moscow-proposes-non-aggression-pacts-nato tags: [russia, nato, non-aggression-pact, european-security, diplomacy, ukraine] author: "Alexander Buran, Marina Slivenko" publisher: "XAB.info" --- # Moscow Proposes Three Formats for Non-Aggression Pacts with Individual NATO Countries ![Alexey Drobinin, a high-ranking Russian Foreign Ministry diplomat, standing in front of the Russian flag.](https://xab.info/media/2026/11/11/rf-pakty-o-nenapadenii-s-otdelnymi-stranami-nato/rf-pakty-o-nenapadenii-s-otdelnymi-stranami-nato-1.webp) ## Key Points - Drobinin proposed three formats: collective alliance, political agreements, and bilateral non-aggression pacts - Moscow did not specify which NATO countries or under what terms such pacts could be made - The issue of new security architecture was previously raised by Medinsky during Abu Dhabi talks - European politicians are divided: some demand a ceasefire in Ukraine first At a security conference in Moscow, high-ranking Russian Foreign Ministry diplomat Alexey Drobinin presented three potential formats for future agreements that he envisions as part of a new European security architecture. Speaking to attendees, Drobinin emphasized that such agreements could be discussed in the context of the peace process regarding Ukraine and are intended to provide additional security guarantees for the parties involved. The statement came amid ongoing discussions on how to build a sustainable security system on the continent after the protracted conflict. ### Three Formats: From Collective Alliance to Bilateral Pacts The first format proposed involves creating a collective defense alliance or concluding bilateral mutual assistance agreements. As an illustration, Drobinin cited treaties Russia already has with Belarus and North Korea. The second format consists of political agreements under which parties would commit not to provide assistance to each other's adversaries in the event of aggression; the diplomat cited the agreement with Iran as an example. The third and arguably most resonant option is bilateral non-aggression pacts, which, according to Drobinin, could be concluded with individual NATO member states. "For example, agreements of this kind could be concluded with individual NATO member states, which would then receive, for instance, additional individual security guarantees from the Russian Federation," the diplomat stated. ### Uncertainty in the Details However, Drobinin did not specify which Alliance countries Moscow would like to see as participants in such arrangements or under what specific terms they are proposed. The lack of detail raised questions among observers: it is unclear whether this refers to Eastern European countries located closest to the Russian borders or a wider circle of states. Furthermore, the question of how such bilateral pacts align with NATO’s collective obligations under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty remains unclarified. ### Connection to Abu Dhabi Talks The topic of a new European security architecture was previously raised by Russia's chief negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky. According to him, this issue was central during two days of negotiations in Abu Dhabi. Thus, Drobinin's proposal at the Moscow conference can be viewed as an evolution and concretization of the line outlined on the diplomatic track in the UAE. Moscow, it seems, is attempting to offer European capitals an alternative security model in which bilateral and multilateral guarantees play a key role, rather than exclusively the Alliance's collective mechanisms. ### Reaction from European Capitals The idea of broader security arrangements for Europe is drawing a mixed reaction among European politicians. Some argue that such discussions should only be held after real progress is achieved in settling the war in Ukraine, particularly after a ceasefire. In their view, discussing a new security architecture without ending hostilities creates an illusion of diplomatic progress not backed by concrete steps on the ground. Other European voices, conversely, allow that parallel negotiations on long-term security guarantees could serve as an incentive for ending the conflict. As of the publication of this note, no NATO country has officially responded to Drobinin’s speech. ## Fact-Check & Sources - [РФ хочет заключить со странами НАТО пакты о ненападении в рамках новой архитектуры безопасности](https://www.rbc.ua/ukr/news/rf-hoche-uklasti-krayinami-nato-pakti-nenapad-1794404590.html) - Direct report of Drobinin's speech at the Moscow conference, quoting the diplomat, mentioning Medinsky's talks in Abu Dhabi and the reaction of European politicians. Facts align with the article's core. ## FAQ ### What three agreement formats did Drobinin propose? The first is a collective defense alliance or bilateral mutual aid agreements (examples: treaties with Belarus and North Korea). The second is political agreements not to assist adversaries in the event of aggression (example: agreement with Iran). The third is bilateral non-aggression pacts, potentially with individual NATO members. ### Did Drobinin name specific NATO countries? No. The diplomat did not specify which Alliance states Moscow would like to see as participants in such pacts or under what terms they are proposed. ### How have European politicians reacted to the proposal? The reaction is mixed. Some European politicians believe that discussions on a new security architecture should only occur after progress in resolving the war in Ukraine, specifically after a ceasefire.