Russia’s primary justification for the invasion is that its foreign ministry called for the U.S and NATO to “cease military in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, commit against further NATO expansion toward Russia, and prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in the future.” The U.S and NATO allies rejected these demands and even sent additional military assistance to Ukraine.
Ukraine isn’t an official member of the E.U or NATO, meaning its members aren’t bound by treaties to send ground forces to fight in the Russo-Ukrainian War. The Ukrainian government has been pushing for years to gain membership in these organizations, but this is very high stakes and lengthy process. Membership essentially makes Ukraine a part of the West, and Putin would never let this stand. Barry Pavel, senior vice president at the Atlantic Council, stated that Putin is most scared of “having a thriving democratic country with a lot of kinship with Russia right on his border.” The Russian leadership has become more hostile and demanding since the early 2000s. Hence, “the need for a security balance in Europe effectively makes Ukrainian membership impossible as long as Putin sits in the Kremlin.”
Sources:
https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/conflict-ukraine
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/17/ukraine-nato-eu-european-union-membership/
______________________________________________________________________________________
In Conflict Resolution, it is essential to understand all parties involved in a conflict.
–What is each leader thinking? What is each leader asking for? Is there any way there can be a compromise?
It’s easy for the West to call Putin crazy and someone who “wants the old Soviet Union back.” Still, as much as we disagree with him, for a resolution to occur, it’s vital to at least attempt to understand Russia’s side and, if anything, has helped provoke him to the point we are today.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, many hoped the cold war ideology could be put behind and that the powers could work for a more cooperative and better world. Nato had done its job.
In negotiations with US Secretary of State James Baker, the then president Gorbachev had insisted that Nato should not move one foot east.
President Clinton pushed to expand the Nato alliance to the very borders of Russia. Some experts felt the move east was done despite negotiations held with Gorbachev and was provocative, unwise, and an unambiguous signal to Russia: We are not willing to make you a cooperative partner in the management of European or world affairs; we will exercise power available to us, and you will have to put up with it. This same message was also later sent by Bush.
A group of 50 prominent foreign policy experts, including former senators, retired military officers, diplomats, and academicians, sent an open letter to President Clinton outlining their opposition to NATO expansion, believing it would bring Russians to question the entire post cold war settlement and foster instability.
That was just the beginning of warnings. Throughout the 21st century there have been a sheer number of top foreign policy experts and strategic thinkers who warned the same caution.
George Kennan, one of America’s greatest foreign policy strategist and the author of the cold war strategy said: NATO expansion was a tragic mistake that ought to ultimately provoke a “bad reaction from Russia.”
This clip is from 2014. Foreign policy expert John Mearsheimer predicted what would happen if we continued on the path of encouraging Ukraine to think they will become part of the west. Time and time again, like others, he did not agree with Nato Expansion and warned the US to stop trying to push it on Ukraine.
Here is the full lecture of John Mearsheimer in 2014 on Russia, The US, and Ukraine if you are interested: https://youtu.be/JrMiSQAGOS4