You link to a tweet of a deliberately edited speech by Stoltenberg to suit their own agenda. It's the worst kind of propaganda that anyone can see through given five minutes of research. I don't know what's worse, that you presented it as damning evidence or that people take 280 character tweets at face value.

In any case, the full quote with the missing section emphasized in italics is:

> Then lastly on Sweden. First of all, it is historic that now Finland is member of the Alliance. And we have to remember the background. The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine. Of course we didn't sign that.

> The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second class membership. We rejected that.

> So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite. He has got more NATO presence in eastern part of the Alliance and he has also seen that Finland has already joined the Alliance and Sweden will soon be a full member. Because at Vilnius Summit, we agreed a statement where it was clearly expressed how Sweden will do more, follow up the agreement we had in Madrid on fighting terrorism, and also address issues related to export of military equipment, and then Türkiye made it clear that they will ratify as soon as possible.

For those who don't see the problem with removing military infrastructure from every former satellite state that fled the USSR it's this: throwing your allies back to the wolves who hunted you is as about as morally bankrupt as it comes.

And just to really make it clear which countries Russia wanted put back to the wilds, it's Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Finland.

For anyone who is interested, the full speech is available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_218172.htm

A big example of this that comes to mind to me (as a space nerd) is the ISS and various American rockets developed around that time. The US footed much of the bill for the ISS and offered Russia a ridiculously good deal in offering to launch their modules and setting up the seat exchange with Soyuz. Boeing and Lockheed Martin adopted Russian rocket engines for their rockets despite the national security concerns of having major launchers dependent on a potential adversary. This second decision caused a good bit of harm to domestic rocket engine design in the US.

Of course part of the goal was to give Russian rocket scientists a more peaceful task to work on than spreading out to Iran, North Korea etc, but it was also a great chance for Russia to integrate further with the West and expand their historical prominence in space technology.

Instead, they've done everything to ensure that they never get such a deal again, and have allowed their space industry to atrophy significantly.

There's talk about how if Russia had been allowed into NATO they'd have been able to channel their energy into more constructive pursuits, but they were given an opportunity to do that for space technology and did not do so.