With the demise of the communist-led countries of eastern Europe and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, the world breathed easier and we all felt that we would no longer stand permanently on the edge of a nuclear Armageddon. The post-cold war escalation of Nato activities and the encirclement of Russia threatens, once again, to take us back to those precarious times (800 UK troops join Nato force, 27 October). One doesn’t have to be an apologist for Putin to recognise that Russia is being demonised and the recent reinforcement of Nato troops in Estonia and Romania will only increase Russia’s fear of western intentions and ratchet up the danger of conflict.

The idea that Putin’s Russia poses a threat to western Europe is a myth concocted by the US and the military-industrial complex in order to assert its worldwide hegemony. Russia’s effective intervention in Syria to prop up Assad and to prevent the forces of Islamic fundamentalism taking over does not fit the script written by the US and its allies, so there is a renewed determination to punish them – an extremely dangerous tactic that could backfire catastrophically. We need to demand that our government plays no role in this unnecessary escalation.

John Green

London

• You report that “tensions between Nato members and Russia have been heightened since Moscow annexed Crimea in 2014 and Ukraine descended into civil war as a result”. I would like to stress the importance of using correct wording when describing the situation in eastern Ukraine so that readers are not misled about the real essence of the conflict.

The international community, including organisations such as the UN, EU, OSCE and the Council of Europe have clearly recognised that there is nothing but Russian aggression against Ukraine which has led to the illegal annexation of Crimea and the military aggression in the east of Ukraine. In total, Russia has occupied 47,000 sq km of Ukrainian territories which is more than the territory of a number of European states.

Natalia Galibarenko

Ambassador of Ukraine to the UK

• Your article “Cold war 2.0” (25 October) suggested that “extended sanctions could weaken Putin’s grip on power”. My impression was that this had been western policy towards Russia for more than 10 years now, during which time President Putin’s popularity within the country has never fallen below 60% and at present “languishes” at 82%. I think it was Einstein who defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

Paul Hewitson

Berlin, Germany

• Your article“Cold war 2.0” refers to “the day after Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine”. But, as was reported at the time, the Crimean parliament had declared independence from Ukraine following a plebiscite, then petitioned the Russian duma to be reincorporated into Russia, which was duly granted. One may or may not approve of how this all happened, but the process was different to what your writers imply.

Prof Robin Milner-Gulland

Washington, West Sussex

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