John Mearsheimer is one of the world's most respected international politics philosopher in realism. I tend to agree with him pretty close to 100% of the time and would love to see him as the next Secretary of State or Defense. This is a great piece, here is an exert:

Quote: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.

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/1...ests-fault

Ukrainians hate Russia. Most of the people that I know from Ukraine have told me that most of the people in Ukraine wanted nothing to do with Russia's proposal for an economic union.

In their eyes, Russia helped put a puppet president in place to keep Ukraine under their influence and rob Ukraine of its resources.

They've long wanted greater ties with the west because that is where the wealth is. Ukrainians are the poorest people in Europe with income levels far below that of Mexico. They've seen their former soviet companions in the Baltic countries, Poland, and the Slavic states thrive because of their ties to the west while they still live in extreme poverty.

What is going on in Ukraine is the result of Ukrainians wanting to take the country in a different direction and Russia not liking that.

Sure you can make the argument that the west tried to make Ukraine into a more western country by offering them an economic partnership, but the Ukrainians could have told them to **** off. They didn't because they saw it as a path to greater economic prosperity. Ukraine's government did tell them to **** off and the people revolted and overthrew the government. They've had to endure Russian economic policies for decades and it hasn't gotten them anywhere.

I wasn't aware that the rule of law is a liberal principle.

Yeah, not our fault. Putin's just a bear riding bully.

(08-21-2014 08:17 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  I wasn't aware that the rule of law is a liberal principle.

In international politics, it is. Liberalism is tied to democracy, treaties and international law as a way to prevent war. Realism teaches that states are unitary and rational and act in their self-interest.

(08-21-2014 08:20 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Yeah, not our fault. Putin's just a bear riding bully.

Putin acted in his own self interests, nobody is arguing against that. The West made miscalculation supporting the Ukrainian coup, which led to the crisis.

(08-21-2014 08:27 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:20 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Yeah, not our fault. Putin's just a bear riding bully.

Putin acted in his own self interests, nobody is arguing against that. The West made miscalculation supporting the Ukrainian coup, which led to the crisis.

So, was the entire Cold War our fault as well?

(08-21-2014 08:27 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:27 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:20 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Yeah, not our fault. Putin's just a bear riding bully.

Putin acted in his own self interests, nobody is arguing against that. The West made miscalculation supporting the Ukrainian coup, which led to the crisis.

So, was the entire Cold War our fault as well?

The Cold War of bipolar hegemony was not a bad thing according to Mearsheimer.

https://www.theatlantic.com/past/politic...mearsh.htm

(08-21-2014 08:34 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:27 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:27 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:20 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Yeah, not our fault. Putin's just a bear riding bully.

Putin acted in his own self interests, nobody is arguing against that. The West made miscalculation supporting the Ukrainian coup, which led to the crisis.

So, was the entire Cold War our fault as well?

The Cold War of bipolar hegemony was not a bad thing according to Mearsheimer.

https://www.theatlantic.com/past/politic...mearsh.htm

Thanks for the article. Interesting read.

However, I'd take peace over annual school hiding under the desk nuclear bomb drills. Like that would have made a difference anyway. lol

One thing about Cold War is that at least we knew who the enemy was. With terrorist, we have no idea. We first encountered that with Korea/Vietnam and didn't win either of those wars.

(08-21-2014 08:37 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:34 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:27 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:27 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:20 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Yeah, not our fault. Putin's just a bear riding bully.

Putin acted in his own self interests, nobody is arguing against that. The West made miscalculation supporting the Ukrainian coup, which led to the crisis.

So, was the entire Cold War our fault as well?

The Cold War of bipolar hegemony was not a bad thing according to Mearsheimer.

https://www.theatlantic.com/past/politic...mearsh.htm

Thanks for the article. Interesting read.

However, I'd take peace over annual school hiding under the desk nuclear bomb drills. Like that would have made a difference anyway. lol

One thing about Cold War is that at least we knew who the enemy was. With terrorist, we have no idea. We first encountered that with Korea/Vietnam and didn't win either of those wars.

Here is a list of all his publications with links, including op-eds going back to 1991. Not all of his predictions panned out exactly, but I think you will find we would have been better off heeding his advice.

http://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/all-pubs.html

(08-21-2014 08:03 AM)Niner National Wrote:  Ukrainians hate Russia. Most of the people that I know from Ukraine have told me that most of the people in Ukraine wanted nothing to do with Russia's proposal for an economic union.

In their eyes, Russia helped put a puppet president in place to keep Ukraine under their influence and rob Ukraine of its resources.

They've long wanted greater ties with the west because that is where the wealth is. Ukrainians are the poorest people in Europe with income levels far below that of Mexico. They've seen their former soviet companions in the Baltic countries, Poland, and the Slavic states thrive because of their ties to the west while they still live in extreme poverty.

What is going on in Ukraine is the result of Ukrainians wanting to take the country in a different direction and Russia not liking that.

Sure you can make the argument that the west tried to make Ukraine into a more western country by offering them an economic partnership, but the Ukrainians could have told them to **** off. They didn't because they saw it as a path to greater economic prosperity. Ukraine's government did tell them to **** off and the people revolted and overthrew the government. They've had to endure Russian economic policies for decades and it hasn't gotten them anywhere.

This. While I respect Mearsheimer POV, its clear he views Urkraine as a satellite Russian state and not a rational actor trying to chart its political future. What is so different about Urkraine that they shouldn't follow in the footsteps of the Baltic States, Georgia, Poland and East Germany?

(08-21-2014 08:34 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  The Cold War of bipolar hegemony was not a bad thing according to Mearsheimer.

This is one reason I don't share your respect of Mearsheimer, though I usually appreciate reading his perspective.

I think his argument boils down to the fact that the west failed to recognize Moscow's sovereignty over the Ukraine, which, of course, does not exist. His view is deeply rooted in the cold war sphere of influence thought, as evidenced by your quote above.

(08-21-2014 12:02 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(08-21-2014 08:34 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  The Cold War of bipolar hegemony was not a bad thing according to Mearsheimer.

This is one reason I don't share your respect of Mearsheimer, though I usually appreciate reading his perspective.

I think his argument boils down to the fact that the west failed to recognize Moscow's sovereignty over the Ukraine, which, of course, does not exist. His view is deeply rooted in the cold war sphere of influence thought, as evidenced by your quote above.

1. It was the West, not Russia that did not respect Ukraine's sovereignty when they helped were complicit in staging the coup. Like it or not, the Russian friendly government was elected.

2. The argument is that the Russian response was to be expected, given their interests and the fact that the coup posed a threat to Russia itself.

No. Putin will continue to bully until he is stood up to. Russia doesn't believe that the Ukraine is a valid state. Nor Georgia, Moldova, Belarus, etc.

(08-22-2014 08:49 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  No. Putin will continue to bully until he is stood up to. Russia doesn't believe that the Ukraine is a valid state. Nor Georgia, Moldova, Belarus, etc.

That's the entire point of Mearsheimer's piece. Putin feels Western interference in Ukraine was a security threat to Russia.