yes, that's usually how this works
> My guess is Merkel and Macron were right in 2008: trying to get Ukraine and Georgia into NATO would have meant war with Russia
Merkel just wanted cheap resources and "strategic independence" of USA. Nobody actually expected NATO vs Russia war in 2008 no matter which decision was taken. It was selfish and short-term politics, simple as that.
> as Ukrainian I would think the same
Ukrainians overwhelmingly disagree, but I'm sure you would be in the minority that is "right" :) You know better without actually living there after all :)
But I actually have an opinion and this carnage is terrible.
I am against participation in the war and stand by it. Western war mongers do more harm than good, and no one should rely on them.
(the political situation is very different, but it is a lesson anyway, do not trust your allies, they have their own agenda)
The plans before WW2 were for Poland to defend for several months before the help arrives. WW1 made it look realistic. Blitzkrieg made it impossible, but it's anachronistic to view it as a betrayal. They simply didn't knew.
Anyway, no matter how you look at it - Poles still fought for returning to the "western Europe" after that "betrayal". Because west might "betray" you, but Russia will genocide, censor, torture and exploit you till barely anything remains.
These are the choices people in Eastern Europe have to make.
If West didn't joined WW2 - Holocaust would finish succesfully. Then the plan was to starve most of Slavs, keep the rest as slaves and settle German colonizers in Ukraine to feed the 3rd Reich.
By now we would have Nazis control half of Europe and have nukes. Much better? Or maybe the "warmongers" had a point?
Ukrainians tried to find peace with Russia since 1991. There's just no way to do it. Russia wants to annex the whole Ukraine. They openly say this on their TV. And russian occupation isn't "safe". If you participated in any patriotic organisation, if you have Ukrainian tattoo, if you were important cultural or political figure - you are on russian list and they will kill you after they occupy Ukraine. This already happens on occupied territories. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/21/us-claims-russ...
Ukrainians don't have a choice. And people like you make their situation worse.
I do not rule out that I am wrong and that a tolerable agreement with Russia is not possible.
But then the problem of defeating a nuclear-armed state remains.
The few pacifist-minded people like me are not relevant anyway. But it is relevant that the West ultimately does not want nuclear war, and also avoids sending troops. The support is enough for a long bloody war, the outcome is uncertain, I am pessimistic.
I agree: this is not planned betrayal (though there is some cynicism) but may end catastrophically anyway.
Why is this any different to the many times in the past a nuclear armed state has lost a war?.
Mearsheimer: Russia Sees ‘Existential Threat,’ Must Win
https://peaceworker.org/2022/04/mearsheimer-russia-sees-exis...
>https://peaceworker.org/2022/04/mearsheimer-russia-sees-exis...
When Russia saw an existential threat when Wagner was marching towards Moscow nothing happened.
Russia doesn’t understand appeasement they only understand force.
It’s kinda sad how badly the realists like Mearsheimer have utterly failed to model Russian behaviour.
Giving Russia appeasements in Ukraine would just embolden them to try again.
They must lose decisively.
Any threat of nuclear war from Russia pales in comparison to the threat of future wars when nuclear proliferation goes through the roof, because you can invade whoever you feel and always win with nukes.
For his penchant for pushing half-truths, and intellectually distorted reasoning in other forms.
He explained: (1) the root cause lies in the April 2008 NATO summit Declaration that Ukraine (and Georgia) “will become members of NATO”;
The root cause of what happened to the so-called victim was their going out dressed like that last night. Also, if anything that summit was known for conspicuously "kicking the can down the road": It was more notable for declining to accept their applications of that time, precisely because of Russia's objections -- instead downgrading them to "aspirant" status.
There is no evidence in what Putin has said that he wants to make Ukraine part of Russia,” Mearsheimer adds.
Well, not all of it. He just wanted to annex parts of it. Leaving behind a rump state permanently pliable to Moscow's interests.
Its important to note, that this statement (and, particularly, the accompanyiny decision not to offer Membership Action Plans to Georgia and Ukraine at the time) was reporting a positive response to Russia’s urgent demands to delay Georgia and Ukraine admission to promote regional peace and stability.
Also worth noting that, yes, Russia immediately invaded Georgia after it, so there is a pretty good argument that this acquiescence is a key turning point in Russian aggression, but this undermines rather than supports that the problem was NATO expansion—the problem was NATO weakness.
Why does Ukraine need a deal? Ukraine already has at least one international agreement that Russia signed saying they would never threaten the borders of Ukraine in anyway.
What is going to stop Russia from breaking any future deals, like they have broken deals in the past?.
What Ukraine needs is for Russia to leave because they realise that staying in Ukraine is too devastating for their country.
Evidently this the only thing Russia understands, force.
Not much, probably sanction them, cut off ties and generally cease trade.
But I don’t think they’d invade, nor do I think if they did invade they would commit the horrible crimes (genocide, rape and torture of children, etc) that the Russians seem to love to do.
I agree in the case of Russia, China seems to be dovish in regard of Ukraine.
"If West reacted in 2008 how they react now - we could have saved 100s of thousand of people AND avoided 2 wars"
I'm not sure here. My guess is Merkel and Macron were right in 2008: trying to get Ukraine and Georgia into NATO would have meant war with Russia. (actually Russia and Georgia fought a war in 2008 about South Ossetia).
In my opinion Russia is the bad revisionist guy, but the politics of the West were amateurish and reckless. And in my opinion Ukraine needs a deal and it should have tried to keep Minsk 2. And I do not see this as colonial mindset, as Ukrainian I would think the same.