James, you do not get to decide what poses a threat or a provocation to Russia. As far as I know, you are not the leader of Russia, nor are you charged by the Russian government in any official capacity.

I suggest you google the words "sovereignty", "independence" and "self-determination".

Only Russia is able to decide what poses a threat to its sovereignty, its national interest, or its existence.

The USA decided it was a threat to their sovereignty and/or existence have Soviet nuclear missiles stationed in Cuba; the USA decided that Iraq posed a threat to its sovereignty and/or existence, even though Iraq was 10,000 km away from the nearest US border. Same with Afghanistan. Same with Panama. Same with Grenada.

The UK decided that the Islas Malvinas were actually Britain's sovereign territory, even though they were located exactly on the opposite side of the Earth.

So NO, James, YOU do not get to decide what constitutes a reasonable threat to Russia. Only Russia gets to do that.

Secondly, your argument that NATO is a purely defensive alliance is counterfactual. Look at what NATO did to Serbia. To Libya.

Russia would be foolish to allow NATO to construct a giant forward operating base right in the heart of its territory. The fact that you are even arguing like this makes me think you must be on some spook's payroll.

Thirdly, I can hardly believe that you are making the argument that NATO "keeps a firm lid on corruption". Are you aware that Bulgaria is in NATO?