If NATO/etc had abandoned Ukraine, and Russia had successfully taken it over - and maybe Belarus and Moldova next - then they might have been tempted to try attacking a peripheral NATO member to test if NATO really means what it says (whether or not they would have succeeded). NATO supported Ukraine to prevent that real threat of Russian military aggression against NATO.
This is what doesn’t make sense. If Ukraine joined NATO, they would never attack Russia, as it would escalate into a MAD scenario. Ukraine had no reason to attack Russia other than to regain Crimea, and Russia had no reason for Crimea other than their naval base, and of course the Russian speaking population in Crimea.
It might halt their current invasion because Putin could claim it as victory from the complete mess he's gotten Russia into. But NATO potentially expanding to Ukraine wasn't the reason Putin attacked Ukraine.
Nah, it is pretty clear that Russia goal is control of Ukraine. The only role membership in NATO play is that if that theoretically happened, it would be harder to attack Ukraine later on.
And there was no immenent threat of Ukraine entering nato anyway. This is just Russia using it as excuse.
Not clear what your point is? Are you saying that indeed there was any chance of Nato invading Russia? I think that was what you're implying, but I'm not sure, since you replied to me with a question.
Do you have any scenario of how that would happen, so that Russia's invasion of Ukraine makes any sense as a preemptive move?
With Ukraine under the hood, it wouldn't have been that difficult. I know that NATO is a defensive alliance but it can go an offensive if members agree. Not saying that this is a valid argument for Russia invading Ukraine.
Exactly. The only reason NATO isn't in Ukraine and kicking the invaders out right now is because Ukraine isn't a NATO member. Meanwhile, NATO has been very clear about defending every inch of their member's territory. That's a very convincing argument for Russia's neighboring countries. I live in one of them, and I've been against a NATO membership until now, because I ruled out the possibility of war in Europe in my lifetime. I was wrong.
This sounds very plausible. And not just against NATO I would guess. They've deployed almost their entire active land force to Ukraine leaving their enormously long borders unprotected.
This makes no sense, sorry. If NATO was truly hellbent on invading Russia and just threw 5-10% a year into building up a huge tank army, Ukraine wouldn't have made a difference. Not to mention that the Baltic route towards Moscow is shorter.
A Russian puppet state in Ukraine would've given Russia an "early" warning of about a week. Would they be able to muster a defense in a week? Of course not. Would they be able to conventionally defend against NATO? Of course not. That's why their doctrine has been "any conventional invasion against Russia will be answered with nuclear weapons", and that's a great deterrent. That nobody actually wants to invade Russia is the cherry on top of the "if you invade, the world ends" threat.
The Russian invasion certainly surely has plenty of reasons, but "we're afraid of NATO" is all the way down the list. Much higher will be: domestic politics, fertile grounds for farming, natural resources to exploit, increasing the size of the population you can steal from, and likely also a generous amount of "I'm old, I want to be remembered as the man who returned Russia to former USSR-glory".
No my argument is based on NATO members being perfectly able to join up with non-NATO members to invade another country without needing to do it through NATO. Ukraine did not need to join NATO to join with them to wage war against Russia, if that is what they wanted. They only wanted to join for defensive reasons, and with very good reason as it turns out.
There is no reason to join NATO except for defense. Zero. None. Yes, NATO members do sometimes gang up to invade other countries, but they would also do so if they weren’t NATO members.
The idea anyone would attack Russia, with its countless nuclear weapons, is silly. Ukraine obviously wanted to join NATO to defend against Russia, not to attack it.
NATO could simply have promised that Ukraine would never be a NATO member or shadow NATO member, but instead they entertained it and organized a coup in 2014. Just backing off any time over the previous decade would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of fewer dead young men.
This isn't to say that Ukraine can't defend itself from Russia, or that the invasion was good, but a simple recognition that there were things that led to this situation that were unforced.
The point of NATO has been said to "Keep the Americans in, the Germans down, and the Soviets out" [of Europe]. Post-1991, there is no need for it and it has mainly been used to provoke and bomb other countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia, and now Ukraine/Russia. Arms manufacturers are kissing their freshly printed dollar bills and thanking our economic system for their great fortune.
It probably would have deterred Russia from invading and saved most NATO countries a ton of money. Basically the entire point of NATO is to stop Russia going to war with its neighbiors.
And now Ukraine is going to be quite a week equipped and experienced ally. Certainly a country NATO should be happy to have on its side.
No. Ukraine was attacked because Russia wants Ukraine territory a d is not accepting its right to exists as independent nation.
The above is Russian goal with or without talk about NATO. The debate about maybe joining NATO sometimes in future might have speed up Russian plans. But Russia objection to Ukraine in NATO is basically "it would made it harder to annex them".
Then one could also argue that no NATO country has ever fought off Russia.
Ukraine barely stopped the Russians, even with the massive help of NATO (both before and after the 2021 invasion). It doesn't follow at all that NATO thinks Ukr is a member. Ukr is just that - a buffer country that should not be taken by Russia. This is not meant in an offensive way, think of it as a neutral country like Switzerland or Austria.
No, he was wrong. Ukraine is not part of NATO and Russia is attacking them. Had Ukraine was part of NATO, chances are Russia would not be attacking them. Or at least, NATO would had duty to help them.
The reason to be in NATO is to prevent Russia from attacking you.
reply