The RUSI article certainly isn’t Russian propaganda, but I also don’t think it supports your point(s). I don’t want to turn you into a straw man, but I read the RUSI report you cited a few days ago, and to me it didn’t support any arguments saying the west provoked Russia into invading UKR. I apologize if I’m mis-representing your opinions.
Sorry, lots of back and forth. To summarize, I contend that:
- I think it's not really up for debate that Putin seeks to restore Russian hegemony in Eastern Europe in a 'multi-polar world' (his words in his national security policies going back to since he took office)
- Putin's decision to invade Ukraine was informed by an estimation that Russian annexation would be popular and therefore the operation would be short (RUSI article)
- Putin's decision to invade Ukraine was also partially based on NATO's force build-up in the Baltics (Professor interview) and actions taken by the US over the last 10-15 years that he interprets as provocative.
- Putin is an autocrat who will use unethical / immoral means to stay in power, but I don't particularly care about that when it comes to US national security interests.
- Russia interferes in foreign governments when it suits them, and so do we. That will never stop.
- Despite the hand-wringing over China, Russia remains the only country with the military capability and operational knowledge to conduct significant non-nuclear kinetic operations on the US homeland. Their blunder in Ukraine was underestimating the will and capability of their enemy.
- It's important to consider counter-arguments and try to look at things through Russia's lens (to the extent that is possible being raised in a western liberal society) in order to try to get to yes on mutual agreements, which are necessary to ensure the long-term security of the United States.
Were I running for President, I would continue to support Ukranian sovereignty (which in reality is costing us very little despite MSM making it sound like we're breaking the budget over this) while also attempting to warm relations with Putin. Economically and militarily, we have to stop making him believe that he needs to take territory by force to create a self-sufficient Russia to hedge against US military and economic power. If an agreement to reduce our force posturing in the Baltics and removing US sanctions in exchange for pulling back from Ukraine is what needs to be done, then I'd be willing to do it. I don't see what our alliance with these countries does for the U.S. except commit us to an undesirable and unpopular conflict while provoking a nation we need to have diplomatic and economic relations with on some level to achieve global prosperity and security.
Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is that the world map is probably going to be re-drawn with borders currently mimicking the front lines. I would not be willing to commit the ground forces necessary to enable the Ukranian army to recapture its lost territory, and the longer this conflict goes the more Russia is going to un-fuck itself.
The major challenge any President faces at this point is that Putin has seen 4 administrations that have run the gamut from calling him an ally to a threat, and at this point has very little reason to trust that any policy or agreement we make with Russia won't flip every 4-8 years.
