Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin

Prof. John Mearsheimer teaches at the University of Chicago and belongs to the realist school of thought in international politics, which holds that countries' behaviors are explained by power considerations. Many leading diplomats hold this point of view (e.g. Kissinger), and the content of this audiobook can also be explored on Youtube videos with the same title.A sobering eye opener, to inform quick and opinionated analyses we hear these days of the currrent aggression and war in Ukraine, with what led to February 24th. From Gorbachev comments on NATO expansion that he shared with the US Congress on April 16th 1997: “You may not humiliate a nation and their people and think it’ll have no consequences”. To Putin's on February 10th 2007 at 43rd Munich Security Conference: “I think it is obvious that NATO expansion [..] represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust.”, and Kissinger's stark reminder on the Washington Post on March 5th, 2014. All the way up to NATO exercises on Russia's borders in Summer of 2021.Overall, it does not take responsibilities away from the Russian leaderships for this war, but takes away the innocence from the West, when looking at the horror Ukranians are going through.

There is a video lecture of this article online free to watch along with other lectures. Argues that US push for Nato membership to Ukraine and Georgia led to Russian aggression and attempt to take back the balance of power before it seeped to the West.The weak points are the downplay of Ukrainian and Georgian decisions to want democratic elections and be part of the West rather than Russia. He does say that if Ukraine behaves like a sovereign state to make decisions about who it forms alliances with it will likely get itself into trouble and since Ukraine is a sovereign state we are here with a Russian invasionProvides good insight into the current crisis in Ukraine but shouldn't be an excuse for Russian aggression.

This is absolutely one of the better and reflective analysis of the Ukraine crisis that I've seen. Think about the following: Why does more or less every (western) media article on this issue see the problem in a time perspective of less than five years? This article is really valuable in also explaining how things look "on the other side of the hill", a perspective that should not be ignored if you strive for a peace and conciliation (and even if you don't). And I am not only talking about the perpectives of the elite, but how ordinary russians see these things. And so, at the very least, the "west" should have foreseen what was coming (for instance based on the clear reactions from Russia, the situation in Georgia etc), following Mearsheimer's logic. The article could be said to be a realist analysis of the issue, while I believe it is really worthwhile a study for all. So if you have any interest in the Ukraine crisis, and generally subscribe to the view that the world is not all black and white, then by all means - read this article.

The crisis in Ukraine could not possibly have anything to do with the West. Ukrainians made a conscious choice to choose western democratic values and shun completely the authoritarianism of Putin's Russia. Anybody following events in Ukraine can see this very clearly. Therefore this study cannot be taken seriously. The main point is that such essays are written by people who have an axe to grind about the West but know nothing about Ukraine and its aspirations.