| UA-RU WAR | NATO Crisis | ANALYSIS & DISCUSSION

[william]

But... Russia had already invaded Crimea and started this conflict in 2014? Therefore the claim that the US & Ukraine provoked this war in 2021 has little ground to stand on.

I think blaming your own past President for a war unleashed by Russia only plays into Putin's hand. Unfortunately, the post shared above is pretty much exactly what the Kremlin has been pushing for the past 4 years.

The Western “Guarantees” to Mikhail Gorbachev and NATO Expansion: What Was Promised, What Was Implemented, and What Was Broken

The Western “Guarantees” to Gorbachev and NATO Expansion

Explore the debate over the West’s 1990 assurances to Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand eastward toward Russia’s borders—and how NATO’s subsequent enlargement has fueled strategic mistrust and geopolitical tension.

www.geopolitika.it

Documents show Gorbachev was assured US wouldn't expand NATO into Central and Eastern Europe

The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991.

www.historynewsnetwork.org

There is no doubt in my mind that western powers (mainly the US) took advantage of the collapse of the USSR to expand east and Russia is and was very paranoid about that.

 

[GBS61]

There is no doubt in my mind that western powers (mainly the US) took advantage of the collapse of the USSR to expand east and Russia is and was very paranoid about that.

These were verbal assurances—they are worth nothing, especially since none of those leaders were still in power:

NATO expansion dates:
• 1999: Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic.
• 2004: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.
• 2009: Albania and Croatia.
• 2017: Montenegro.
• 2020: North Macedonia.
• 2023: Finland (April 4, 2023).
• 2024: Sweden (March 7, 2024).

By the time of Finland and Sweden’s accession, Russia had already invaded Ukraine.

 

[Yingyang]

These were verbal assurances—they are worth nothing, especially since none of those leaders were still in power:

NATO expansion dates:
• 1999: Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic.
• 2004: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.
• 2009: Albania and Croatia.
• 2017: Montenegro.
• 2020: North Macedonia.
• 2023: Finland (April 4, 2023).
• 2024: Sweden (March 7, 2024).

By the time of Finland and Sweden’s accession, Russia had already invaded Ukraine.

Thankyou Putin

 

[Publius]

But... Russia had already invaded Crimea and started this conflict in 2014? Therefore the claim that the US & Ukraine provoked this war in 2021 has little ground to stand on.

I think blaming your own past President for a war unleashed by Russia only plays into Putin's hand. Unfortunately, the post shared above is pretty much exactly what the Kremlin has been pushing for the past 4 years.

So what exactly should the US be doing at this point in time irrespective of past foreign policy actions or lack of them.

Should we Continue as we have for four years believing that it will eventually produce a different result. Or should we be looking at ways to escalate and impose more pressure economically and or kinetic.
I hear everyone saying trump’s approach is wrong. And to some degree I agree.
Just what exactly should NATO be doing to push back sufficiently on Russia.

 

[GBS61]

Just what exactly should NATO be doing to push back sufficiently on Russia.

The USA needs to stop supporting Russia; as far as I am aware, they are still part of NATO. NATO cannot take any action without the agreement of all 32 members—or, alternatively, the USA could take the drastic step of leaving NATO.

The USA is very harmful to NATO

 

[Sentry]

Should we Continue as we have for four years believing that it will eventually produce a different result. Or should we be looking at ways to escalate and impose more pressure economically and or kinetic.

The latter. What's happening right now isn't enough, but there's no reason to choose an arguably worse approach that alleviates kinetic & economic pressure on Russia. I'm all for trying out something new but I'd rather have a strategy that does something rather than nothing. A half full glass is better than an empty one.

 

[GBS61]

Or should we be looking at ways to escalate and impose more pressure economically and or kinetic.

Currently, the USA is doing the exact opposite.

 

[Publius]

The USA needs to stop supporting Russia; as far as I am aware, they are still part of NATO. NATO cannot take any action without the agreement of all 32 members—or, alternatively, the USA could take the drastic step of leaving NATO.

The USA is very harmful to NATO

AS FAR AS I KNOW NATO has not agreed or adopted a member agreement regarding Ukraine.
Is the NATO treaty organization providing weapons and aid to Ukraine, or individual members.
Has NATO voted on or came to any consensus amongst the members of what is acceptable.
Has the treaty organization had an article 5 request over Ukraine.
The 2022 article four request by eastern members was for consultations to reinforce and strengthen natos eastern boarder with Russian. Not an organizational policy statement regarding Ukraine.
As far as the big three deciding that’s a hard no, not a definitive determination.
Witkoffs recently meeting again called for meetings between Ukraine Russia and the US. That is the only negotiated path forward.
If NATO as an organization finds that as a whole they have a vested interest in the outcome. Then they might make that clear.

The US could withdraw from all negotiations regarding Ukraine. Continue to send the minimal amount of arms and aid and let those in Europe who seem so vested in defeating Putin and regaining all of Ukraine pick up the slack and responsibility

 

[GBS61]

Witkoffs recently meeting again called for meetings between Ukraine Russia and the US. That is the only negotiated path forward.

Moscow has rejected peace proposals delivered by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff in St. Petersburg, deeming the plan formulated in Oslo to be lacking any substantial progress. Specifically, the Kremlin opposes a freeze along the front line and continues to demand a full withdrawal of the Ukrainian army from the Donetsk region. For further details, visit bluewin.ch.

 

[Publius]

The latter. What's happening right now isn't enough, but there's no reason to choose an arguably worse approach that alleviates kinetic & economic pressure on Russia. I'm all for trying out something new but I'd rather have a strategy that does something rather than nothing. A half full glass is better than an empty one.

Ok I agree 100%, what might that look like and who is going to start sending more arms, who is going to close off the remaining loop holes for Russian oil and gas. Who’s going to step up SIGNET flights and satellite data facilitating data for Ukraine to launch even more destructive attacks inside Russia. Russias striking civilian targets, the logical progression is Ukraine does the same.

Is India turkey Europe china and yes the US ready to impose a complete embargo of Russian goods.
These are ALL factors that directly contribute to the success or failure of a war. Everything else is just talk.

Logically as one member of this group of nations. If everyone is not committed to doing what’s necessary to prevail why shouldn’t the US try to deescalte.

I find it incredibly ironic that we have multiple nuclear powers in a direct conflict via a proxy over a nation and region historically apart of all the major parties.
And we’re ridiculing the one leader who is trying to deescalate the war.

 

[Publius]

Currently, the USA is doing the exact opposite.

Well yeah that’s obvious, so what! Who in NATO is or can send more advanced weapons to Ukraine on a larger scale. Who’s going to get directly involved.

 

[GBS61]

Well yeah that’s obvious, so what! Who in NATO is or can send more advanced weapons to Ukraine on a larger scale. Who’s going to get directly involved.

Germany: The second-largest overall supplier of arms (accounting for approximately 12% of major deliveries), providing Leopard tanks, Iris-T systems, and armored vehicles.
• United Kingdom and France: Key European players providing deep-strike weaponry and cruise missiles (Storm Shadow / SCALP).
• Poland: A major logistical and military actor (accounting for approximately 11% of the imports received by Kyiv), serving as a vital hub on the eastern flank.

However, the USA has thrown a wrench in the works by lifting certain sanctions against Russia.