> But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs as leverage. Financial infrastructure as coercion. Supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.
He's right - sanctions on Russia for Ukraine is the most prominent example of this.
Rather, Russia attacked Ukraine as a great power oppressing a smaller power, and had every opportunity to cease, with or without international intervention. No one attacked Russia first.
Sanctions on Russia due to the war in Ukraine (and other bad actors) and whatever the hell orange mussolini is doing are not even remotely close to being a similar situation.
Norway, a founding member of NATO, has always shared a border with Russia. Before Finland and Sweden joined NATO, they'd already developed operational compatibility with NATO going back decades. NATO encroachment was an issue only insofar as it took away local targets for Russian expansion.
Bring Russia into NATO.
Putin desired NATO membership because then, any hostilities with another NATO member would become an intra-alliance conflict that NATO couldn't deal with. When Greece and Turkey fought over Cyprus, they were both in NATO, so neither side could invoke article 5 for help. Russia in NATO wouldn't prevent Russian wars, it would neutralize NATO.
For the same reason that the USA would go ape-shit if Canada allowed Chinese military bases on Canadian soil.
Given the fact that tRump has threatened Canada it would be justified on Canada's part to invite those military bases but it would definitely antagonize the Americans. Would that be wise?
We're talking Real-Politick here not "how it should be".
They do invite military bases they just happen to align with the same politics.
I just don't get why Russia sympathizers act like Ukraine must absolutely be some kind of DMZ or neutral state. It doesn't make sense. They can do what they want and it's not an excuse to invade their country.
If Scotland had won independence and then later invited Russian bases on Scottish soil, would England see that as a threat or "Scotland is an independent nation and can do whatever it wants"?
They were not offered NATO membership. Putin hinted to Clinton he would like it. Clinton didn't respond. Came back later (after consulting with his staff) and declined the offer.
Putin is smart enough to know that Russia is in no position to be an imperialist power.
The goal of keeping Russia and Europe (Germany) apart is not a secret. Please see Zbigniew Brzezinski.
And I'd like to point out that the Soviets kept Germany divided for a justifiable reason: 27 million Russians died at the hands of Germany's imperial ambitions.
And while we are on the subject of "bullshit", the war in Ukraine did NOT start in Feb 2022. It started long before that.
Helmut Kohl's was the one snubbing Putin ambition of NATO membership, not Clinton.
> And I'd like to point out that the Soviets kept Germany divided for a justifiable reason: 27 million Russians died at the hands of Germany's imperial ambitions.
And it lasted for generations, from 45-89, that's at least 2 generations of Germans who went through a divided nation. Has Germany been a problem to Russia afterwards? Doing what, buying petrol, and nat gas from them?
> And while we are on the subject of "bullshit", the war in Ukraine did NOT start in Feb 2022. It started long before that.
I never stated that, I live in Europe, the annexation of Crimea is very much in recent memory. The subjugation of Georgia previously as well.
Putin had support for decades to participate in Europe as a peer nation, even after Georgia in 2008. If Putin really wanted to be in NATO then why did he created an issue with Georgia becoming closer to the rest of Europe in 2003 transforming into a full blown invasion in 2008?
The difference is that previously these economic levers were used as sanctions against bad actors like Russia, whereas now under Trumpism they're used on a whim against allies and everybody else.
He's right - sanctions on Russia for Ukraine is the most prominent example of this.