I think everyone in Europe is keen on "mutually beneficial economic exchange with Russia and China" but I think that recent history demonstrates that Russia and China have different views from us about what mutually beneficial means.

>Putin, repeatedly, has been shown to be a reliable, and predictable partner

Oh come on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Sergei_and_Yulia_...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Vrb%C4%9Btice_ammunition_...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_bounty_program

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Montenegrin_coup_d%27%C3%...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence_movement#...

and many other gigs!

Putin has not shown to be an reliable ally. The annexation of Crimea and the ongoing hybrid war in east Ukraine is one such example.

Putin does not want a strong independent ally next to Russia. He either wants puppet states such as Belarus as allies or a weak and fractured European union. For all the faults the US have they are still better allies than Russia by several lightyears.

May be if granted a buffer zone of influence, Russia will be a reliable partner to Europe. To me it is Europe (and the US) that is picking ideological battlegrounds, and showing eagerness to start a new cold war.

Granted a buffer zone of influence?

Let me rephrase that for you from the perspective of someone who lived on Russia's doorstep for many years.

You mean to say "Maybe if we let Russia subjugate a lot more people and confine them into an evil exploitative system against their will".

That's the big difference between Europe's zone of influence and Russia's zone of influence. People want to be part of the EU (the greatest thing that ever happened to the country I was born in). People want to give their lives to not be part of Russia.