The cost of maintaining a large military becomes more burdensome and costly in a static or shrinking economy (Russia & North Korea are the prime examples).
No one is suggesting Russia give up its nukes; Russian nukes are needed to maintain the tripolar balance with China.
Conservative (talk) , 23 March 2018 (EDT) See how the world has changed: Russia is number 12 in world GDP behind UK, France, India, Italy, Brazil, Canada, and South Korea (no wonder they got booted out if the G8).
Yet Russia remains #1 in nukes and #2 in missile defense spending. Russia wants to join NATO, but views it as a threat because of NATO's refusal to allow them membership.
And NATO can no longer pretend to be a defensive alliance after Obama, Hillary, Sarkozy & Cameron used it offensively to attack Libya. If Russia ever became a NATO member, it would extend the alliance’s territory to China, which has a 4,000-kilometer border with Russia. "Russia’s global ambition." Russia doesn't have global ambitions.
Rob SRussia can't become a NATO power because the rules are written to exclude Russia. This would upset the tripolar global security balance between NATO, Russia and China," This is the primary reason. NATO requires that its members have civilian and democratic control over their armed forces." Another joke. This should be obvious since it withdrew from East Germany & Cuba.
Peter Ka (talk) , 23 March 2018 (EDT) Russia is well known for the hacking/technological prowess of its people.
Russia would be ungovernable as a democracy has been the consensus of historians for a long time.
Russia, and the ethnic groups that identify as part of Russia, have always looked to a strong man leader.
3, the tripolar balance with China, applies to Russia as well.
Russia is afraid of isolating China and making China feel threatened, just as NATO has isolated Russia and made Russia feel threatened by encroaching upon its Near abroad.