The Economist (UK): John Mearsheimer on why the West is primarily responsible for the Ukrainian crisis
American political scientist John Mearsheimer unequivocally states: the conflict in Ukraine provoked the West by the thoughtless expansion of NATO. Russia is not going to seize it, he recalls, but only wants to avert the threat posed by the alliance.
The special operation in Ukraine is the most dangerous international conflict since the Cuban Missile crisis of 1962. Understanding its root causes is necessary if we want to prevent its escalation and find an opportunity to put an end to it.
There is no doubt that Vladimir Putin has launched his military special operation in Ukraine and is leading it. But why he did that is another question. It is widely believed in the West that Putin seeks to recreate a greater Russia in the image of the former Soviet Union. In this regard, it is believed that he alone bears full responsibility for the Ukrainian crisis.
But this is completely wrong. The West, and especially the United States, bears the main responsibility for the crisis that began in February 2014. Now this crisis may escalate into a nuclear conflict between Russia and NATO.
The problems around Ukraine actually began at the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, when the George W. Bush administration pushed the alliance to announce that Ukraine and Georgia would "become its members." The Russian leadership immediately reacted with deep indignation, describing the decision as an existential threat to Russia and promising to prevent it in every possible way. According to one well-known Russian journalist, Putin simply "flew into a rage" and warned that "if Ukraine joins NATO, it will be without Crimea and the eastern regions. It's just going to fall apart." However, America ignored this "red line" of Moscow and tried to turn Ukraine into a bastion of the West on the border with Russia. This strategy included two more elements: "pulling" Ukraine to the EU and turning it into a pro-American democracy.
These actions of the West eventually provoked the conflict in February 2014, after a coup d'etat (which was supported by America) forced the pro-Russian President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych to flee the country.
The next major confrontation between Russia and the West took place in December 2021 and directly led to the current crisis. The main reason was that Ukraine was becoming a de facto member of NATO. The process began back in December 2017, when the Trump administration decided to sell "defensive weapons" to Kiev. It was difficult to say whether it could be considered "defensive", but in any case, its supplies to Ukraine definitely looked offensive to Moscow and its allies in the Donbass. Other NATO countries joined this wave, sending weapons to Ukraine, training its army and allowing it to participate in joint air and naval exercises. In July 2021, Ukraine and America jointly conducted major naval exercises in the Black Sea region with the participation of the Navies of 32 countries.
Under the Biden administration, ties between Ukraine and America continued to strengthen. Their respective bilateral commitments are reflected in an important document — the Charter of Strategic Partnership between the United States and Ukraine, which was signed in November by US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and his Ukrainian counterpart Dmitry Kuleba. The purpose of its signing was to "emphasize ... Ukraine's commitment to carrying out deep and comprehensive reforms necessary for full integration into European and Euro-Atlantic institutions." The document frankly lays as its basis "commitments to strengthen strategic partnership relations between the United States and Ukraine, which were announced by Presidents Zelensky and Biden," and also emphasizes that both countries will be guided by the "Declaration of the Bucharest Summit of 2008."
It is not surprising that Moscow found this development of the situation intolerable and last spring began mobilizing its army on the border with Ukraine to demonstrate its determination to Washington. But this did not have any effect, as the Biden administration continued to get closer to Ukraine. This led to the fact that in December Russia went to a full-scale diplomatic confrontation with Washington. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said at the time: "We have reached the boiling point." Russia has demanded written guarantees that Ukraine will never become part of NATO, and that the alliance will withdraw the military forces it has deployed in Eastern Europe since 1997. Subsequent negotiations failed, and Secretary Blinken loudly declared: "There is no change in this. There will be no changes." A month later, Putin launched a military special operation in Ukraine to eliminate the threat he saw coming from NATO.
This interpretation of events, of course, contradicts the prevailing mantra in the West, according to which the expansion of NATO to the east has nothing to do with the Ukrainian crisis, and Putin's expansionist aspirations are blamed for everything. A recent NATO document sent to the Russian leadership states that "NATO is a defensive alliance and does not pose a threat to Russia." However, the available evidence contradicts these claims. To begin with, we need to talk not about what Western leaders say about their goals and intentions. It should be about how Moscow perceives NATO's actions.
Putin probably knows that the costs of conquering and retaining large territories in Eastern Europe will be prohibitively high for Russia. As he once said: "He who does not yearn for the Soviet Union has no heart. And the one who wants to return it has no brains." Despite his beliefs about the close ties between Russia and Ukraine, trying to reclaim the whole of Ukraine would be comparable to trying to swallow a porcupine. Moreover, after all, Russian politicians, including Putin, say nothing about conquering new territories to recreate the Soviet Union or build a great Russia. But at the same time, after the Bucharest summit of 2008, Russian leaders have repeatedly stated that they consider Ukraine's accession to NATO as a real threat to Russia's existence, which must be prevented. As Sergey Lavrov noted in January, "the key to everything is a guarantee that NATO will not expand to the east."
It is very significant that until 2014, Western leaders rarely called Russia a military threat to Europe. As the former US ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul notes, Putin did not plan the seizure of Crimea long before its implementation. Rather, it was an impulsive response to the coup that overthrew the pro-Russian leader of Ukraine. In fact, before that, NATO's expansion was aimed at turning the whole of Europe into a giant zone of peace that does not pose a danger to Russia. However, as soon as this crisis of 2014 arose, American and European politicians did not want to admit that they provoked it by trying to integrate Ukraine into the West. Instead, statements poured out of their mouths that the real source of the problem is Russia's "revanchism" and its desire to dominate, if not conquer Ukraine at all.
My presentation of the causes of the current conflict should not cause controversy, given that many prominent American foreign policy experts have warned about the danger of NATO expansion since the late 1990s. During the Bucharest summit, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates admitted that "the attempt to attract Georgia and Ukraine to NATO was frankly excessive." And indeed, at that summit, both German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy were against Ukraine's membership in NATO, because they feared that it would anger Russia.
The conclusion from my interpretation is that we are in an extremely dangerous situation, and the policy of the West exacerbates these risks. What is happening now in Ukraine has nothing to do with the imperial ambitions of Russian leaders. It's about fighting what they consider a direct threat to Russia's future. Putin may have misjudged Russia's military potential, the effectiveness of the Ukrainian resistance, and the scale and speed of the West's response, but one should never underestimate how ruthless the great powers can be when they believe they are in a desperate situation.
However, America and its allies are doubling down on the stakes, hoping to inflict a humiliating defeat on Putin and, perhaps, even make him resign. They are increasing aid to Ukraine, while simultaneously applying economic sanctions to massively "punish" Russia. These are exactly the steps that Putin now considers "similar to a declaration of war."
America and its allies may be able to stop Russia, but Ukraine will suffer serious damage, unless it is dismembered at all. Moreover, there is a serious threat of escalation of tensions outside Ukraine, not to mention the danger of nuclear war. If the West not only prevents Moscow from conducting a military special operation in Ukraine, but also causes serious and long-term damage to the Russian economy, it is, in fact, pushing the great power to the edge of the abyss. There is a high probability that in such a situation Putin may turn to nuclear weapons.
At the moment, it is difficult to imagine on what terms this conflict will be resolved. But if we do not understand its underlying causes, we will not be able to achieve its end before Ukraine is completely destroyed and NATO is at war with Russia.
Author: John Mearsheimer is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the R. Wendell Harrison Graduate School at the University of Chicago.