“Ukraine is not just a neighboring country for us. This is an integral part of our history, culture and spiritual space,” Vladimir Putin said in a speech in February before the start of the war.. It was a shocking speech that shook the world. Western countries have banded together in an unprecedented response to the Russian invasion by imposing sanctions and sending military aid to Ukraine.. Almost the entire world has united in condemning Russia, although heavyweights such as India and China have remained silent.. Even as Putin frankly announced his justifications for the war, some began to look for other culprits..

In particular, political scientist George Mearsheimer from the University of Chicago argued that the war in Ukraine began “through the fault of the West, especially the United States.”. He argued that the crisis could have been avoided if not for NATO's decision to admit new members after the Cold War.. Mearsheimer especially blames the US because in 2008 they recklessly began pushing for NATO expansion by granting membership to Ukraine (and Georgia) while ignoring Moscow's " And he is completely wrong, writes Ivo Daalder, US permanent representative to NATO in 2009-2013, in an article in The Economist..

Even on the Russian war against Ukraine, too much ink has been wasted on why NATO is to blame for Russia threatening a neighboring country.. But after the invasion, after Putin declared Ukrainian statehood a fabrication, after bombs dropped on hospitals and orphanages, after the relentless bombardment of Mariupol began, further blaming NATO for everything is, frankly, absurd.. With the end of the Cold War, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe were able to look at a future without external domination for the first time in decades.. The question was, would it be a future without wars. In 1990, Professor Mearsheimer argued that soon everyone would begin to miss the Cold War.. He was convinced that without this conflict, NATO would fall apart, as would the Warsaw Pact alliance.. The US will leave Europe.

Professor Mearsheimer's experiences were shared by leaders in Washington and European capitals.. But instead of disbanding NATO and withdrawing US troops from Europe, US leaders realized that a stable European future required both the Alliance and the US military.. They rallied around the vision of George W. Bush, which he outlined in May 1989 in an article entitled " NATO was important to both goals.

[see_also ids\u003d"

In the early 1990s, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe asked for membership in the Alliance so that they could enjoy the same peace and security as all Western European participating states.. NATO allowed new members to join, as it did throughout the Cold War. An “open door” policy has emerged that is fully consistent with the security declarations signed by all European countries, including Russia. These documents were supposed to guarantee the right of each country to choose independently Alliances and agreements in the field of security. Within 15 years of the fall of the Berlin Wall, 10 countries formerly part of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR joined the Atlantic Alliance. Moscow expressed its discontent all the time, however it itself developed a close relationship with the Alliance and signed the " And in 2002, the NATO-Russia Council appeared. In 2000. Putin even allowed Russia to join the Alliance.

The prospect of membership in both the Alliance and the EU has given the countries of Central and Eastern Europe a vital incentive to reform their economies, governance systems and transform into market democracies. Membership also brought welcome security assurances from the US and other NATO countries.. These guarantees were especially important for countries such as Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland, bordering Russian territory..

For NATO and the new members, as well as the rest of Europe, enlargement has brought security and stability to every part of Europe where conflict has continued throughout history.. However, the European zone of stability and security did not extend to the entire continent.. Ukraine, in particular, remained outside the NATO umbrella. In 2008, Kyiv tried to change that by asking the Alliance to start a Ukrainian accession process.. The allies were divided on the correctness of such a step. Some feared Moscow's reaction. Instead of postponing the issue due to lack of consensus, NATO came up with language that ruled out immediate membership, but promised that Ukraine would become a member of the Alliance in the future.. Compromise did not satisfy anyone. Ukraine received a promise, not real membership. The Allies remained divided on this issue as before..

[see_also ids\u003d"

Russia was also unhappy. “Ukraine is not even a country,” Putin told President George W. Bush. Despite the promise that NATO made in 2008, there is no clear prospect for Ukraine to join exactly, nor did it 14 years ago. But, oddly enough, Professor Mearsheimer argues the opposite, calling Ukraine " Because, after Russia invaded Ukrainian territory in 2014, the US began to train the Ukrainian army, and later send weapons.

This is ridiculous. Before the war, NATO repeatedly stated that it would not defend Ukraine because it was not part of the organization.. After five weeks of active hostilities, the Alliance still repeats that it will not come to defend the Ukrainian state. Because it's not NATO territory.

“The problem is not that NATO expansion has gone too far. The problem is, it didn't go far enough.. If Ukraine were a member of NATO, if American and Allied forces were deployed on its territory to protect it, Putin would think twice before starting a war against a nuclear-armed army that outnumbers Russia's.. This is the potential for deterrence,” the article says..

If the US and Alliance troops were on Ukrainian territory, the responsibility for unleashing a war against NATO would be on the shoulders of Russia. But after the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the responsibility for intervening in the hostilities will be on NATO, not on Russia.. This is a real lesson for the future.. When this war is over, NATO will decide whether to invite Ukraine into the Alliance and thus prevent the resumption of Russian aggression.. Given the damage and destruction Russia has already instigated, the Alliance's decision is clear..