Whatever "one inch" are you talking about? Is it paraphrased from some treaty? Any document or even just a declaration?
There were no "color revolutions in Central Asia". And NATO was never interested in Central Asian countries other than Afghanistan, other than a short lived American affair with the Manas Transit Center (for the war effort in Afghanistan 20 years ago), and even Afghanistan has been abandoned.
And you know what? Shevardnadze himself soon became president of Georgia and began courting NATO to accept his new and independent country. Like here: https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2002/s021122h.htm This is how irrelevant is what they told Shevardnadze in 1990 when everything was completely different.
And you know what else? I just found a 2009 interview where Shevardnadze himself will explain everything to you (also about Gorbachev, who in fact wanted to "encircle Russia" totally by having the Soviet Union join NATO once the Cold War was over):
SPIEGEL ONLINE: In February 1990, Germany's foreign minister at the time, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, assured you that "NATO will not expand to the east," and that states like Poland and Hungary could never be part of the military alliance. Because the conversation had revolved mainly around East Germany, Genscher even became more explicit, saying that: "As far as the non-expansion of NATO is concerned, this also applies in general." According to reports, you replied that you believed everything he said. So why didn't you get this commitment from NATO on paper?
Shevardnadze: Times have changed. At the time we couldn't believe that the Warsaw Pact could be dissolved. It was beyond our realm of comprehension. None of the participating countries had doubts about the Warsaw Pact. And the three Baltic states, which are now part of NATO, were still part of the Soviet Union then. Eventually, we agreed that a united Germany could be part of NATO under certain conditions. For example, a national army limited to 370,000 members and Germany waives the right to nuclear weapons. An expansion of NATO beyond Germany's borders was out of the question.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: At the end of March 1990, Genscher and the then US Secretary of State James Baker, talked about the fact that there was interest among "central European states" about getting into NATO. You knew nothing of this?
Shevardnadze: This is the first I've heard of it.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Did you have a conversation with your colleagues in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary about a possible eastward expansion of NATO in the spring of 1990?
Shevardnadze: No, that was never discussed in my presence.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The German documents give the impression that Moscow counted on the dissolution of both the Warsaw Pact and NATO. Did you really think that would happen?
Shevardnadze: That may have been discussed after I resigned from the ministry of foreign affairs in December 1990. However during my time in office it was not.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: In May 1990, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev brought up the subject of the Soviet Union joining NATO during talks with the Americans. The Americans took that very seriously.
Shevardnadze: Gorbachev had that idea but he never took any realistic steps towards achieving this. Which is why it was never really discussed amongst the Soviet leaders.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Was the eastward expansion of NATO ever discussed in the inner circles of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1990?
Shevardnadze: The question never came up.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Did the subject play a role in the ratification process of the Two-Plus-Four agreement (where the signatories included the two Germanys and the four powers that occupied Germany after World War II) that unified Germany?
Shevardnadze: No, there were no difficulties whatsoever with the ratification process.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Nevertheless, the eastward expansion happened a few years later. Did you feel, at the time, that the German diplomats deceived you?
Shevardnadze: No. When I was the minister of foreign affairs in the Soviet Union, NATO's expansion beyond the German borders never came up for negotiation. To this day I don't see anything terrible in NATO's expansion. Even Georgia was given the green light to join NATO at the Bucharest summit in April 2008.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: At the conference in Ottawa on German unity in February 1990, you had five telephone conversations with Gorbachev. Did you discuss a possible NATO enlargement -- beyond the GDR?
Shevardnadze: No. We only had German reunification on the agenda, nothing else. It was important to clarify our position, because France and Britain were opposed to the reunification of Germany. They were afraid of the emergence of a superpower with a huge political, military and economic potential, right in the center of Europe. The most stubborn of all reunification opponents was the British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. When she spoke to Gorbachev in June 1990, they discussed the subject for hours. In the end she changed her position.
Gorbachev was a Soviet leader, surely he didn't talk about the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic's relations with NATO during this Cold War meeting. As relevant as the Ribbentrop-Molotov if they talk about "Soviet borders".
And yes, it was always independent countries courting NATO to be allowed to join (and Georgia sent troops to Afghanistan and Iraq for that, and still was refused - Ukraine had also sent their troops to these NATO missions). There was never any sort of NATO's drive to "encircle" any country ever since the end of the Cold War, the expansion on the side of the organisation has been extremely relucant and we in Poland also had to work hard to be allowed to achieve the accession to the pact. It took over 8 years of asking: https://www.gov.pl/web/national-defence/poland-in-nato-20-years
During your completely irrelevant "one inch" talk, we were still in the Warsaw Pact (named after our capital). As a satellite of the Soviet Union, the country that haven't existed for 30 years, and is now replaced by Ukraine, among others.
What in https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2002/s021122h.htm also with the very same Shevardnadze "is unclear exactly" to you in the completely new situation now after the end of the Soviet Union, and the Warsaw Pact too, when literally everything has changed?
Georgia's future as an independent nation is hinged on obtaining firm guarantees for the-protection of these very values and we, therefore, strongly welcome further eastward expansion of the Alliance. We congratulate all those nations that have been invited to become full members of NATO or will be offered to join in the very" near future. As the president of a Black Sea state, I am particularly satisfied that the invitations have been extended to Romania and Bulgaria. This brings the Black Sea area into NATO's sphere of interests and adds a new dimension to its security.
We welcome the progress in deepening the cooperation between NATO and Russia and the distinctive partnership that has been forged between NATO and Ukraine since we regard these developments as a cornerstone not only of the Euro-Atlantic, but also of global security.
South-East Europe, particularly the Caucasus region has been gaining ever greater importance for the entire continent and the Euro-Atlantic community at large. The region serves as a major outlet for the Caspian hydrocarbons to world markets and at the same time provides the shortest routes linking the West to the natural wealth, labor and markets in Central Asia, Afghanistan and the Far East. The same routes, however carry the risk of becoming thoroughfares for the spread of new transnational threats, different from those of the past including threats posed by terrorism. We, therefore, consider that the region of the South Caucasus and Central Asia, indeed merits the special attention the Alliance has shown by deepening cooperation with it.
Anyone who has spent at least a week in Georgia knows well that by virtue of the dynamic development of the civil society, practically every problem of serious concern becomes here a subject of heated public debate. Yet, I can also assure you that perhaps the only issue in the recent years against which no reasonable argument has ever been suggested is the Georgian public's perspective on the future of the country's national security which is widely seen in the context of the country's membership in the North Atlantic Alliance. I am happy that at the Summit of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council I can declare that Georgia is determined to be a full member of NATO and is resolved to work hard to prepare for this historic mission.
Looks to me Shevardnadze was, let's say, much less interested even 20 years ago in your stupid "one inch" quote someone told him in the completely bygone era of a completely different geopolitical reality than you are now in 2022 somehow and for some reason. But you be you.
Whatever "one inch" are you talking about? Is it paraphrased from some treaty? Any document or even just a declaration?
There were no "color revolutions in Central Asia". And NATO was never interested in Central Asian countries other than Afghanistan, other than a short lived American affair with the Manas Transit Center (for the war effort in Afghanistan 20 years ago), and even Afghanistan has been abandoned.
Firstly, https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early. Secondly, Kazakhstan.
And you know what? Shevardnadze himself soon became president of Georgia and began courting NATO to accept his new and independent country. Like here: https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2002/s021122h.htm This is how irrelevant is what they told Shevardnadze in 1990 when everything was completely different.
And you know what else? I just found a 2009 interview where Shevardnadze himself will explain everything to you (also about Gorbachev, who in fact wanted to "encircle Russia" totally by having the Soviet Union join NATO once the Cold War was over):
Gorbachev was a Soviet leader, surely he didn't talk about the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic's relations with NATO during this Cold War meeting. As relevant as the Ribbentrop-Molotov if they talk about "Soviet borders".
What "secondly, Kazakhstan"?
What part of "not one inch" is unclear exactly?
And secondly the color revolution in Kazakhstan that Russia just put down. Every boomer war hawk has been crying about it, you couldn't miss it.
And yes, it was always independent countries courting NATO to be allowed to join (and Georgia sent troops to Afghanistan and Iraq for that, and still was refused - Ukraine had also sent their troops to these NATO missions). There was never any sort of NATO's drive to "encircle" any country ever since the end of the Cold War, the expansion on the side of the organisation has been extremely relucant and we in Poland also had to work hard to be allowed to achieve the accession to the pact. It took over 8 years of asking: https://www.gov.pl/web/national-defence/poland-in-nato-20-years
During your completely irrelevant "one inch" talk, we were still in the Warsaw Pact (named after our capital). As a satellite of the Soviet Union, the country that haven't existed for 30 years, and is now replaced by Ukraine, among others.
What in https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2002/s021122h.htm also with the very same Shevardnadze "is unclear exactly" to you in the completely new situation now after the end of the Soviet Union, and the Warsaw Pact too, when literally everything has changed?
What "color" was this "color revolution"?
And in the case I'd you didn't read:
Looks to me Shevardnadze was, let's say, much less interested even 20 years ago in your stupid "one inch" quote someone told him in the completely bygone era of a completely different geopolitical reality than you are now in 2022 somehow and for some reason. But you be you.