RUSSIA – UKRAINE – A DIFFERENT HISTORIC PERSPECTIVE

In My Opinion always concludes with the words:

“AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE”

In this paper we commence with those words.

Background

NATO was founded in 1949 to create a common defence against the Soviet Union. One of the founding fathers of NATO commented that it’s three main purposes were to “To keep the Americans in, the Soviet Union out, and the Germans down”. However, the last purpose changed once West Germany joined NATO in 1955.[i] 

According to US author, Jeffrey Sachs[ii], the US mainstream media including The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and others hide the true history of the war in Ukraine from the public. During Biden’s term in office as President, he relentlessly promoted NATO enlargement to include Ukraine although Russia viewed NATO enlargement to Ukraine as an existential threat given Russia’s 2,000 km border with Ukraine. Napoleonic France, Imperial Germany, and Nazi Germany all crossed Ukraine to strike at Russia. No Russian leader would tolerate a military alliance moving into Ukraine.

Promises Made and Promises Broken

At the time of German unification in 1991, the West gave multiple assurances to the Russians that NATO would not enlarge provided the USSR agreed to a reunified Germany remaining in NATO. Gorbachev received clear commitments that the borders of NATO would not move eastward.

The National Security Archive at George Washington University, NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard, shows that security assurances against NATO expansion were given to the Soviet leadership by  American and European leaders, Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major and NATO Secretary-General Manfred Woerner.[iii] A recently discovered report in the British National archives also shows that Russia was given those assurances.

Despite those assurances, in1992 the Bush Administration decided to expand NATO and at the NATO Summit in 1997 Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic were invited to begin NATO accession talks. Since 1997, NATO has added 14 new members. America’s Russian scholar, George Kennan described NATO’s expansion as “The most fatal error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era”.  In 2008, US Ambassador to Russia, William Burns warned that Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations touched a raw nerve in Russia. Despite that, NATO went ahead and declared that Ukraine and Georgia would become members of NATO.

In his 2016 book, The New Russia, Mikhail Gorbachev referred to a lost opportunity to build a safer world due to the shortsighted gloating by the USA at the demise of its Cold War rival. Similar sentiments have been expressed by former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating who argued that the US had squandered an opportunity to come to terms with Russia and when Henry Kissinger visited Moscow in 2016, he said, “Russia should be perceived as an essential element of any  global equilibrium, not primarily as a threat to the United States. I am here to argue for the possibility of a dialogue that seeks to merge our futures rather than elaborate our conflicts”.

The West blames the Ukraine problem on Russian aggression, but John Mearsheimer[iv] contends that this account is false and that the US and its European allies were mainly responsible for the crisis. NATO expansion was part of a strategy to move all of Eastern Europe, including Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and to integrate them into the West, antagonizing Russia and turning it into an enemy.

While the West continues to perpetuate the myth that the war in Ukraine is motivated by Putin’s wish to restore the Soviet Union, this blatantly ignores what Putin said in 2010 and has often repeated since then - “Anyone who does not regret the breakup of the Soviet Union has no heart. Whoever wants it back has no brain”.

Peace Proposals

In November 2021, Putin warned that the West had not taken Russia’s “redlines” seriously. Nevertheless, following a conference between Putin and Biden in early December 2021, Biden threatened Russia with  “severe consequences” in reference to the escalation of Russian forces around Ukraine saying, “We have a moral obligation and a legal obligation to our NATO allies if they were attacked under NATO Article 5” although Biden also said, “That obligation does not extend to Ukraine” and he ruled out sending US troops to Ukraine.

In proposals submitted to Washington and NATO in December 2021, Moscow called for a halt to the US led military expansion into Ukraine and demanded that Ukraine never be admitted to NATO. Russia’s demands were dismissed and on 24 February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine.

A Lost Opportunity for Peace

Within days after the start of hostilities, Moscow contacted Zelensky to discuss a compromise to end the war. On 8 March 2022, Zelensky said he was ready for talks on compromises regarding Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea and that he was willing to renounce Ukraine’s bid to join NATO. Russia and Ukraine announced progress towards a peace agreement which was mediated by Turkey and the Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett. The agreement would include a ceasefire and Russian withdrawal if Kyiv declared neutrality and accepted limits on its armed forces. Zelensky declared that Ukraine was ready for neutrality combined with security guarantees as part of a peace agreement.

The tentative agreement was confirmed by Fiona Hill, a former official at the US National Security Council and by Angela Stent, a former National Intelligence Officer for Russia and Eurasia. They wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine, outlining the main terms of the agreement: “Russia would withdraw to its position on 23 February, where it controlled part of the Donbas Region and all of Crimea. In exchange Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries”.

Bennett later said that the US had blocked the proposed peace agreement. Historian Niall Ferguson interviewed several American and British leaders who confirmed that a decision had been taken for “The conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Russia as the only endgame was the end of the Putin regime”.

At the NATO Summit in July 2023 Ukraine’s future in NATO was reaffirmed.

The US Proxy War

The US under Biden sought to undermine, weaken, and potentially destroy Russia, using Ukraine as its “proxy”, but with no US boots on the ground. The Asia Times reported on “Washington’s determination to destroy the Putin regime, if necessary by prolonging the Ukraine war long enough to bleed Russia dry”.  In July 2022, Senator Lindsay Graham said the mission was to use Ukraine to “fight to the last person”. Congressman Dan Crenshaw tweeted that “Investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea”.

Sen Mitt Romney said, “A weakened Russia is a good thing as we (America) are losing no lives in Ukraine”. Sen Richard Blumenthal asserted, “We are getting our money’s worth on our Ukrainian investment because we have enabled Ukraine to degrade Russia’s military strength without a single American service woman or man injured or lost”. The former NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg argued that defeating Russia and using Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia “Will make it easier for the US to focus on China”.

Outgoing President Biden Ups The Ante

The US had resisted supplying Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) to Ukraine fearing that this would cross a Russian redline. However, in September 2023 Biden changed his position and agreed to provide ATACMS but only the short range version. Then, in April 2024 he agreed to supply the long-range version but only to hit targets within Ukraine but not inside Russia. Finally, on 18 November 2024, only days after Donald Trump had won the US election, the Biden administration gave the green light for Ukraine to use ATACMS to conduct strikes on Russian territory.

On his way out, Biden appeared to be deliberately stoking tensions in a manner which could risk World War III. Then, on 20 November in another policy shift, Biden authorised the use of antipersonnel landmines in Ukraine aiming to slow down Russian advances. Amnesty International reacted saying it was “Frankly shocking that President Biden made such a consequential and dangerous decision just before his public service legacy is sealed for the history books”.

Trump Tries to Find a Way

In 2016, when Donald Trump called for friendly relations with Russia he was referred to in the Western media as a “Kremlin client” and a “Putin Puppet”. However, Trump later declined to rule out recognition of Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula and in 2018 suggested that Russia be readmitted into the G7 saying, “I think it would be an asset to have Russia back in - - I think the G8 would be better”. 

After Trump returned to office in 2025 he declared his readiness to resume diplomacy with Russia and to hold talks about the future of Ukraine. In response to questions about whether he was too aligned with Putin, Trump responded saying, “You want me to say really terrible things about Putin and then say ‘Hi, Vladimir. How are we doing on the deal?’” Even before taking office, Trump said he would end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of becoming president! This has proved to be more difficult and a greater challenge than he anticipated.

Peace May Be Coming into View

It appears that a peace deal may be in the air. Presidents Trump and Putin are to meet on 15 August in Alaska. Zelensky has not been invited to participate although Trump has said clearly that he intends to follow up with a meeting with both Putin and Zelensky. Despite that, European leaders continue to insist that Trump could not negotiate a deal without Ukraine and Europe.

Although Zelensky has previously said Ukrainians would not give up their land to the “occupier”, he has since acknowledged that giving up land captured by Russia would have to come about through diplomacy and not on the battlefield. On 11 August, The Telegraph reported that Zelensky had softened his position and could agree to stop fighting and to cede territory which would involve freezing the front line where it is and handing Russia de facto control of the territory which it occupies in Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Crimea.

Even at this late hour the Washington Post wrote on 10 August that the goal of the Kremlin is not only the demilitarization of Ukraine but the “Installation of a pro-Russian regime”. These comments are pure speculation and have not emanated at any time from the Russian leader.

AUDIA ALTERAM PARTEM – HEAR THE OTHER SIDE

[i] Putin's World, by Angela Stent, Professor of Government and Foreign Service, Georgetown Uni 2019

[ii] The Real History of the War in Ukraine, by Jeffrey D. Sachs, 18 July 2023

[iii] Declassified 12 December 2017

[iv] The Great Delusion by John Mearsheimer, Prof of Political Science, University of Chicago