Asu B schrieb am 21.06.2024 17:08:
Würde mich interessieren wo und in welchem Kontext Mearsheimer ihr Zitat gebracht hat.
Er hatte schon 2014 prophezeit, wenn der Westen seine Ukraine Politik (Nato-Erweiterung, westliches Bollwerk an der russischen Grenze) fortsetzt, wird die Ukraine verwüstet werden. Er schlug vor auf eine neutrale Ukraine hinzuarbeiten.Das Originalzitat:
“The United States and its European allies now face a choice on Ukraine.
They can continue their current policy, which will exacerbate hostilities with Russia and devastate Ukraine in the process—a scenario in which everyone would come out a loser. Or they can switch gears and work to create a prosperous but neutral Ukraine, one that does not threaten Russia and allows the West to repair its relations with Moscow. With that approach, all sides would win.“
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-18/why-ukraine-crisis-west-s-fault
Dummerweise war die Ukraine bei Kriegsausbruch neutral, das hat ihr nichts genutzt.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2016-04-18/why-russian-president-putin-took-crimea-from-ukraine
"The biggest problem with the theory that Putin seized Crimea to stop Ukraine from joining NATO is that Ukraine was not heading toward NATO membership when Putin struck. In 2010, in large part to improve relations with Russia, the Yanukovych government had passed a law barring Ukraine from participation in any military bloc. In subsequent years, Kiev settled instead for partnership with the alliance, participating in some of its military exercises and contributing a ship to NATO antipiracy operations—an outcome that Russia seemed to accept. Indeed, when Putin, justifying the intervention in March 2014, claimed that he had “heard declarations from Kiev about Ukraine soon joining NATO,” he excluded an important detail: all the recent public statements to that effect by Ukrainian politicians had come only after Russian troops had already appeared in Crimea."