I hold no brief for Putin or Trump, and, unlike many on the left, I never had any illusions about the Soviet Union. But the conventional narrative on Nato still needs to be challenged (Trump ‘reckless’ on Nato, says defence chair, 17 January). There is no evidence that Stalin or his successors ever had any plans to sweep across western Europe. Indeed, in 1949, when Nato was founded, it would have been quite incapable of doing so, after the devastation it had suffered in the war. Likewise, however deplorable Putin’s actions in what he, like his predecessors, considers to be his backyard, his sphere of influence, this does not make him a threat to the west. What possible motive could he have for an unprovoked attack on any Nato state? But behind Putin’s personal ambitions and great power aspirations, there remains the folk memory of three invasions by western powers, and accompanying paranoia. Whatever Nato may claim, this is not diminished by its expansion to the east. Rather than continuing to base “security” on Nato and military strength, greater support should be given to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), which currently operates with a fraction of Nato’s budget, yet, without any publicity, still manages to defuse some potential conflict situations.

Frank Jackson

(Former co-chair, World Disarmament Campaign), Harlow, Essex

• The comments by Julian Lewis, the chair of the Commons defence select committee, that “European countries, without the US, could deter nuclear blackmail from Russia, because of French and UK nuclear weapons, but not a conventional force attack” indicates that UK and French nuclear weapons would not be used in the event of a “conventional” attack by Russia, which Lewis describes as “our principal adversary”. This is probably a calculation the Russians have already made and surely gives lie to the claim that nuclear weapons are our best form of defence “guarantee”. By soaking up large amounts of defence spending and technical resources, to create the “big stick” which can’t be used on our most likely threat, nuclear weapons leave us in a weaker not stronger position. Since forces are currently being built up on both sides of the “European-Russian” frontline, maybe it really is time to “think it out again”.

David Mellor

Lochwinnoch, Renfrewshire

• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com

• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters