Flying Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin By John J. Mearsheimer According to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the Ukraine crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression. Russian President Vladimir Putin, the argument goes, annexed Crimea out of a long-standing desire to resuscitate the Soviet empire, and he may eventually go after the rest of Ukraine, as well as other countries in eastern Europe. In this view, the ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 merely provided a pretext for Putin’s decision to order Russian forces to seize part of Ukraine. But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine -- beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004 -- were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president -- which he rightly labeled a “coup” -- was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West. Putin’s pushback should have come as no surprise. After all, the West had been moving into Russia’s backyard and threatening its core strategic interests, a point Putin made emphatically and repeatedly. Elites in the United States and Europe have been blindsided by events only because they subscribe to a flawed view of international politics. They tend to believe that the logic of realism holds little relevance in the twenty-first century and that Europe can be kept whole and free on the basis of such liberal principles as the rule of law, economic interdependence, and democracy. But this grand scheme went awry in Ukraine. The crisis there shows that realpolitik remains relevant -- and states that ignore it do so at their own peril. U.S. and European leaders blundered in attempting to turn Ukraine into a Western stronghold on Russia’s border. Now that the consequences have been laid bare, it would be an even greater mistake to continue this misbegotten policy. Full article: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-18/why-ukraine-crisis-west-s-fault
mlsv2f Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 I think it should be added, that most people in Crimea wished not to be put under the boot of the EU/IMF. They saw what was happening in Spain and Greece with the IMF and debt, and the government they just overthrew had gotten them into a similar situation. It wasn't so much Putin "taking" Crimea, but a mutual want from both sides. Hell, they even conducted a vote. Seems what is happening in Eastern Ukraine is similar. Think about it, Western Ukraine is having to draft soldiers to fight in the east, while the resistance in the east is doing so for free. You would have to strongly dislike a government to fight against it for free, on the other side, the West must not have a whole lot of support either, in that they can't get anyone to voluntary fight in the east.
Flying Posted October 17, 2015 Author Posted October 17, 2015 I think it should be added, that most people in Crimea wished not to be put under the boot of the EU/IMF. They saw what was happening in Spain and Greece with the IMF and debt, and the government they just overthrew had gotten them into a similar situation. It wasn't so much Putin "taking" Crimea, but a mutual want from both sides. Hell, they even conducted a vote. Seems what is happening in Eastern Ukraine is similar. Think about it, Western Ukraine is having to draft soldiers to fight in the east, while the resistance in the east is doing so for free. You would have to strongly dislike a government to fight against it for free, on the other side, the West must not have a whole lot of support either, in that they can't get anyone to voluntary fight in the east. Yep. The sad part is, its only the Right Sector that has a drive to fight. Not the US puppet govt in Kiev. The next violence in Ukraine will probably be RS vs the current govt. This is similar to why the govt in Iraq's military had no fight. The ppl in the army were there for a paycheck. This interview is worth a watch. The title is not objective but the content is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KHCNk9BYy4
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin By John J. Mearsheimer According to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the Ukraine crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression. Russian President Vladimir Putin, the argument goes, annexed Crimea out of a long-standing desire to resuscitate the Soviet empire, and he may eventually go after the rest of Ukraine, as well as other countries in eastern Europe. In this view, the ouster of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 merely provided a pretext for Putin’s decision to order Russian forces to seize part of Ukraine. But this account is wrong: the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. At the same time, the EU’s expansion eastward and the West’s backing of the pro-democracy movement in Ukraine -- beginning with the Orange Revolution in 2004 -- were critical elements, too. Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement, and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion. For Putin, the illegal overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president -- which he rightly labeled a “coup” -- was the final straw. He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West. Putin’s pushback should have come as no surprise. After all, the West had been moving into Russia’s backyard and threatening its core strategic interests, a point Putin made emphatically and repeatedly. Elites in the United States and Europe have been blindsided by events only because they subscribe to a flawed view of international politics. They tend to believe that the logic of realism holds little relevance in the twenty-first century and that Europe can be kept whole and free on the basis of such liberal principles as the rule of law, economic interdependence, and democracy. But this grand scheme went awry in Ukraine. The crisis there shows that realpolitik remains relevant -- and states that ignore it do so at their own peril. U.S. and European leaders blundered in attempting to turn Ukraine into a Western stronghold on Russia’s border. Now that the consequences have been laid bare, it would be an even greater mistake to continue this misbegotten policy. Full article: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-18/why-ukraine-crisis-west-s-fault Not Even Western Europe Should Play Nanny to Eastern Europe, Which Is Only Relevant to Russia Mindless gloating triumphalism in the decadent West led to its policy of provocatively encircling Russia with NATO satellites. Imagine if during the Cold War, because of some kind of collapse causing temporary isolationism in the United States, Mexico and Canada had joined the Warsaw Pact. Putin just wants to regain for Russia the sphere of influence it has had for 300 years. First he scared Georgia away from the alliance NATO had been offering it, then he secured much of Ukraine. Right now he in encircling the long-time NATO infringement on his border, Turkey. That's what the Syrian alliance is all about. In order to finish the neutralization of this centuries-long Russian foe, he'll next give aid to Greece, Cyprus, Kurdistan, and Armenia. New NATO member Bulgaria will also feel the Bear Hug.
The Sage of Main Street Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 I think it should be added, that most people in Crimea wished not to be put under the boot of the EU/IMF. They saw what was happening in Spain and Greece with the IMF and debt, and the government they just overthrew had gotten them into a similar situation. It wasn't so much Putin "taking" Crimea, but a mutual want from both sides. Hell, they even conducted a vote. Seems what is happening in Eastern Ukraine is similar. Think about it, Western Ukraine is having to draft soldiers to fight in the east, while the resistance in the east is doing so for free. You would have to strongly dislike a government to fight against it for free, on the other side, the West must not have a whole lot of support either, in that they can't get anyone to voluntary fight in the east. Chickenhawk Kiev Well, we still survive after being taken over by the draftdodgers who ran away to college because they were afraid to grow up and fight their worst class enemy in Vietnam. I guess the Ukraine doesn't have enough suckers who are Proud to Die Taking a Rich Kid's Place.
Recommended Posts