Search results

Completely agreed. Also another thing worth noting: NATO already established a precedent that countries bordering Russia/the Soviet Union can join NATO when it admitted Turkey into the alliance in 1952 as well as both Latvia and Estonia in 2004 (and this is not to mention Norway being a NATO...

I want to return to this thread: AFAIK, Russia's demands were larger than simply not having Ukraine not join NATO. It also included a permanent end to all Western military cooperation with Ukraine and all other ex-USSR states as well as a permanent end to all eastwards NATO expansion. If...

So, why exactly can't the Baltic arrangement also work for Ukraine?

There were also the 2014 Ukrainian elections before that. FWIW, what likely radicalized the Ukrainian protesters in 2013-2014 was the fact that Yanukovych used brutal and bloody violence against them. When they got beaten up for peacefully protesting, well, that made them really angry. And of...

And that's not already the case with the Baltic countries already being in NATO? Agreed!

NATO already includes the Baltic countries; was that a mistake? And Ukraine is a non-Woke country and would have thus made the EU less Woke.

And Russia was trying to aggressively pull Ukraine into the Eurasian Economic Union. And Ukraine was not strong or rich enough to avoid firmly associating with any economic blocs like, say, Japan or South Korea manages to successfully do.

Yep--if only other Europeans and Ukrainians themselves would have actually been smart enough to see this threat in time. I mean the threat from Russia to Ukraine. FWIW, I'd have been open to a compromise where Ukraine becomes neutral but is still allowed to join the EU, develop its own nuclear...

One could have asked the same question about the Baltic countries, and they combined have much less people than Ukraine has. So, why exactly are we committed to defending them from Russian aggression and risking a nuclear war over this?

It will add another Based Eastern European country to resist the Woke Western Europeans.

Neutrality for ex-USSR countries in regards to NATO would need to be accompanied by an open door for them in regards to eventual EU membership. Otherwise, it would be a raw deal for them.

The thing is, though, that Ukraine's 2010-2014 government was uninterested in NATO membership and it's unclear if even Ukraine's post-2014 governments would have actually pursued this matter if it wasn't for the events in Crimea and the Donbass.

Excellent analysis! BTW, you might be interested in this thread of mine: https://www.the-sietch.com/index.php?threads/a-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-just-how-far-would-russia-go-and-what-would-russias-war-aims-be.7049/

Yeah, very fair analysis, actually. Interestingly enough, since Belarus is less corrupt than the rest of the European ex-USSR (other than the Baltics) is, eventual Belarusian EU membership should actually be more feasible if Lukashenko will ever get removed from power, no? Ditto for Georgian EU...

Those were Soviet satellite states more than actual buffer states, though. As for that corruption map, Ukraine could at least be given clear corruption improvement goals in exchange for a roadmap to eventual EU membership or something like that. And Turkey isn't comparable because it's...

Being in the EU is not incompatible with being a buffer state. Well, not so long as you're not in NATO, at least. And Yeah, Russia didn't want Ukraine to sign the Association Agreement with the EU because it made Eurasian Union membership impossible for Ukraine. And interestingly enough, the EU...

Finland and Sweden are buffer states and yet are very rich. And Austria was a buffer state during the Cold War and was likewise very rich even back then. As for Belarus, Lukashenko was able to avoid the emergence of an oligarch class in Belarus like what occurred in Russia and Ukraine in the...

Ukraine's main reason in seeking to join the EU is probably for the money. Money speaks very loudly. If the EU was much poorer, then it would also be much less attractive to Ukraine.

Ukraine can still serve as a buffer state between Russia and NATO even if they will be a part of the EU. Finland and Sweden already serve similar purposes, for instance. Even if Ukraine won't get NATO membership, it should at least be entitled to a roadmap to eventual EU membership, IMHO.

Fair enough, I suppose. BTW, Zbigniew Brzezinski advocated a Finlandization of Ukraine right after the success of the Maidan Revolution there: https://www.ft.com/content/7f722496-9c86-11e3-b535-00144feab7de