Maybe, but it seems like a 3rd option no one is even considering.
But that’s just it, it’s
not an option. It doesn’t solve anything, nor would it do anything to de-escalate tensions. Sure, Russia would be happy in that they get a chunk of Ukraine without firing a shot, but that just means they’re closer to the finish line when they come back for the next round. And make no mistake, there
will be a next round.
What I remember of the Maidan was what I saw at the time on SB and in the western media, and at the time I thought it was justified, because we didn't know at the time about some of the connections between Biden (as VP) and Ukraine, nor did we realize that the incoming person was just as corrupt as the one that was ousted, and I'm not surprised a lot of Ukraine does not see the gov in Kiev as legit.
As the years have gone by and things have come out about what was going on behind the scenes, Maidan looks more and more like just another Color Revolution formeted by Western IC agencies. Add in the 'Russian collusion' hoax the Dems pushed under Trump, and I don't trust the narrative of either DC or Moscow when it comes to Ukraine.
Which is why I see it as a shithole we should not have gotten involved in, or should try to bring into/treat as part of NATO/the EU. If the rebels hadn't accidentally shot down the Malayan airliner, things probably would not have escalated so badly, or had the West get so involved in the issue.
If we want to sell weapons to Kiev, fine; but US/NATO troops on the ground is not worth the risks.
There’s a lot to cover here, but the short form is, you’re taking data points and making assumptions based on things not in evidence. And just because people on SB that you disagree with were supporting it doesn’t automatically mean they’re wrong.
Example: You’re taking the Biden/Burisma thing and concluding that it’s proof that that’s the only reason anyone cares about Ukraine, when all it really does is just confirm Hunter Biden has been making money trading on his dad’s name, and that the elder Biden was either too stupid to realize this or else did realize it and was just being “Mr. Typical Corrupt Politician.” (This being Joe Biden we’re talking about, either option is entirely plausible, and I’m not making a judgment either way, at least not in this thread).
Anyway…to the topic at hand.
The Color Revolutions
were very much domestically driven. In fact, I should note that during the original Rose Revolution in Georgia, the U.S. and Russia were both throwing their support behind Eduard Shevardnadze (at least initially; it wasn’t until later that it dawned on the U.S. that this wasn’t some flash in a pan and they switched their support to Saakashvili -who is himself quite a figure and actually came up during the Maidan protests). Basically, what happened was that after 10+ years of the same old shit, the people in the various republics decided to opt for some changes. This wasn’t just confined to Ukraine and Georgia; it happened in Kyrgyzstan as well, which if you look at a map you’ll notice is nowhere near Europe.*)
The whining about involvement of Western intelligence is one that goes back to the Soviet days. Basically, it’s Russia propaganda meant for domestic consumption, because if the Russians knew just how incompetent their leaders are** they’d storm the Kremlin and summarily execute them all.
In fact, the Orange Revolution in some ways was a
loss for the U.S., because under Leonid Kuchma (the incumbent, whose chosen heir was Yanukovych), the Ukrainians had sent troops to Iraq in support of the U.S. When Yushchenko took office, one of the first things he did was withdraw his support from that endeavor and called the troops home.
The Russia collusion/Trump thing…I can see why you’d be skeptical of anything the press says, but it’s also important to note that this didn’t come in a vacuum. Sure, consider it a cautionary tale in taking news at face value, but don’t automatically assume that the source of the story is lying, or that anyone who disagreed with the story is always going to be telling the truth, either.
Ukraine may be a corrupt state but it’s not some “shithole” country (which term was applied to sub-Saharan Africa which…well…as bad as Ukraine might be it’s not
that bad). Ukraine is a country with a fair amount of natural resources, was the breadbasket of the USSR, and has a few other advantages going for it. It’s one of the biggest countries in Europe, borders a couple of other major NATO and EU members, is located right on the Black Sea and close to the Western world, and has tremendous economic potential.
The West has been taking an interest in Ukraine since the collapse of the USSR because of that. It’s popped up more recently in the news as focus shifted away from the Middle East/Southwest Asia and the war on terror, but I can assure you, interest in Ukraine didn’t come about because of MH-17 and Crimea, or the Orange Revolution. It was
always there; it just became more noticeable because Russia started reverting to its historical MO in full view.
*-One random fact I learned during grad school is that Kyrgyzstan has a German minority -in fact, so does Kazakhstan- partly as a result of a bunch of POWs from the Wehrmacht that got deported to the interior and were released but left there after the end of World War II.
More significantly, I’d note that Kyrgyzstan in 2005 had a U.S. presence because it had an air base at Manas for supporting operations in Afghanistan.
So it’s important to remember, correlation =/= causation.
www.rferl.org
