An attempt to confront the two arguments, pro- and anti-Putin and pro- and anti-Trump, directly, with the impartial spectator as the imaginary "trial" judge
Where does this narrative about "invading Ukraine" come from? It is like saying that Houthis trying to liberate Gaza, "invade Israel". Russia interfered with Banderite conquest of Donbass, which was NOT Ukraine. Donetsk and Luhansk strongly objected to Ukrainian conquest and separated themselves. Banderites were furious and decided to bomb all Donbass civilians as "terrorists" and take Donbass as "the land without people", they mimicked Israel's actions in Palestine. Donbass republics asked Russia for protection and Russia interfered. They never "invaded" anybody. The West gives the Banderites unlimited power over the whole "territory" that has been made up. There cannot be any "sovereign and independent Ukraine" if the land is taken by conquest and civilian massacres. Russia interfered with Ukrainian Nazi conquest, not "invaded Ukraine".
Such narrative is even more untenable, when considering that the pro-Ukraine public, such as Wikipedia, is trying to reframe the war as starting in February 2014. At that time, the "Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation", which was a treaty and not a memorandum (wink wink), was in full force.
Article 12 of such treaty read: "Each High Contracting Party shall guarantee the right of persons belonging to ethnic minorities, individually or together with other persons belonging to ethnic minorities, freely to express, preserve and develop their ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious diversity and promote and develop their culture without being subjected to any attempts to assimilate them against their will." Ukraine clearly broke it.
Article 6: "Each High Contracting Party shall refrain from participating in, or supporting, any actions directed against the other High Contracting Party, and shall not conclude any treaties with third countries against the other Party. Neither Party shall allow its territory to be used to the detriment of the security of the other Party." Ukraine clearly broke it.
Since the circumstances of the treaty were the repression of Crimea in 1994, and the fact that Russia did not respond at the time solely because it was entangled in Chechnya, this is quite significant: it was a warning to Ukraine.
Also it seems to me that nobody actually read the Budapest Memorandum. The oft-cited Article 2: "none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine EXCEPT IN SELF DEFENCE OR OTHERWISE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS". Russia claims that it acted in accordance to the Charter, it never disavowed the memorandum.
My last, cheap shot: I do not blame Skidelsky for believing that there was no genocide in Donbass. I blame his father.
Yes the invasion arguments are an over simplification. The Ukraine gov have been attacking the Donbass from 2014. Absent also from the demonising the Rusdians stance is any mention of the Odessa massacre where Banderites attacked people in a building burning some people alive. Good points Lena
Thank you. About Odessa, I was told by the Ukro-Nazis that it was all fake. That they faked the victims. Even after they saw Paul Moreira's The Masks of the Revolution (that documents how it was done and how people were burned and killed if they tried to escape). Pretty much what Israelis say about Palestinian deaths. The similarity in ideology and mentality of "Ukraine" and Israel just screams in the face, so to speak. Here is a collection of what Ukrainian "leaders" say about Russian-speakers. (plus see the comment by "Fuchs" below, "eat shit vatnik" - vatnik is a derogatory slur for those who tell the truth about Ukrainian Nazism).
"Moskals to the knives" - en masse;
"Moskalyaka na gilyaka" - en masse;
"The enemy is Moscow" - Yarosh;
"I will raise the whole world, so that from this Russia was not left and a scorched field, the remaining Russians in Ukraine should be shot with atomic weapons" - Timoshenko;
"We must drive the Russian language into a ghetto" - Miroshnichenko;
"Shoot any Russian citizen in the head without talking" - Balashov;
"First deceive and then hang Crimeans" - deputy governor of Dnepropetrovsk region;
"Those who work in Russia will not be our allies anyway, so we don't care about their interests" - Parubiy;
"I would act much tougher. I would just shoot them" - Irina Farion;
"Hitler the Liberator" - Governor of Kherson;
"There is no need to talk to Donbass. It is necessary to destroy a million and a half inhabitants and then everything will be solved" - Butkevich;
"During the sabotage operation it is necessary to kill as many Russian citizens as possible" - Gritsenko;
"We must remember that there is a big 360-year Ukrainian-Russian war going on" - Sirotiuk;
"We have 14 percent of Ukrainians who indicated that their native language is Russian, that is the language of the occupier. This indicates a terrible mutation of their consciousness. This is 5 million degenerate Ukrainians." - Irina Faryon;
"We have one way - to destroy Moscow, that's what we live for" - Irina Faryon;
"We need to get used to being fascists, we will need to burn everyone" - Rada deputy Bereza;
"Russia is an age-old enemy of Ukraine" - Dmytro Yarosh; "Russia unleashed a war with Ukraine."
"Russia is an aggressor" - Poroshenko; "Their children will sit in basements" - Poroshenko;
"Killing the inhabitants of Donbass is a good deed" - false patriarch Filaret;
"We must make Donbass NOT livable" - Korchinsky;
"The more we kill Russians now, the less our children will have to kill them" - Ukrainian Ambassador to Kazakhstan Petro Vrublevsky.
Absent from the conversation is the fact that Russia and Ukraine reached a deal prior to the hostilities, which would have kept Ukrainian territory intact, in exchange for alignment with Russia or rather the absence of alignment with the EU/NATO.
Clearly, Russia strongly opposes to have a (quasi) enemy entity at its underbelly and lose access to the Black Sea and transport routes down there.
Putin decided that the conditions were right, that the West is weak enough, and slammed his fist on the table. Obviously, who is or isn't in the right based on this or that international law or treaty matters not now. What now matters is who has a stronger economy and manpower.
It appears that the West has tragically miscalculated. Its grip on the rest of the world, through international organizations, the monetary system, and military power, has proved to be much weaker than assumed. More importantly, Russia has joined forces with the Non-West and is building an alternative order, that involves a promise of liberation from the Occidental yoke for all the countries that have been fucked over by the West for eons (that liberation might be a mirage, but still). Bottom line? It looks like the West has managed to pit the rest of the world against itself, in a situation where its economy is crumbling, industry non-existent, and manpower weakened by transmotherfuckerism. Way to go! Quite an achievement!
What's laughable is that NATO still exists. That organization should be disbanded and a major effort should be made between European countries to eliminate the East-West divide, even though - as I've heard - that's no small feat, as it goes back to the 11th-century Schism, which makes the enmity pretty deeply ingrained in the civilizational tapestry.
From where I'm standing, what's transpiring at the moment is not some rough patch that will be ironed out, whereupon business will go on as usual. There are too many accumulated societal and (geo)political problems, there is the energy predicament (the approaching end of the Oil Age), etc. Humankind seems to be in an inflection point.
The joining of NATO by Eastern European countries after 1997 is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, as are, actually, many other issues, including most of the shit discussed in the text.
A brand-new vision for humanity is needed, not only in regard to how nations will arrange their co-existence, but also how people will live when 'the trucks stop running', which is likely a reality in not too distant a future, say, 50 years from now.
Sadly, very few people see beyond the tip of their nose and focus on all sorts of red herrings, strawmen, and inconsequential bullshit.
This is an interesting exercise and may even help some Russian obsessives begin to think rationally about their attitudes and actions.
However, it ultimately comes down to an argument for and against the international piracy of US led Imperialism. Anyone arguing for more Imperialism at this point is a fool or a complete reactionary. Putin and Russia are not perfect, but they have come under the attack of Imperialism in the form of a literal and proud neo Nazi regime. There is no question they have every right to defend themselves until the aggressor is defeated.
To advance freedom and rationality in the world, Russia must defeat US Imperialism on its border. Russia fights for itself, but in the broader sense of our era, consciously or not, it's fights for humanity. The alternative to a powerful self defense against Imperialism, can be seen in Gaza. Without Russians, without the Chinese the world will look more and more like Gaza. Imperialism must perish if humanity is to flourish once again.
You need to clarify what you mean by Ukrainians. Do you mean a) the 50 million or so people who in 2014 lived in the country called Ukraine. Or b) the Ukrainian speaking virulently anti Russian people living in west Ukraine.
The a) Ukrainians in elections and opinion polls wanted to be neutral. Indeed in 2008 joining nato got the same opinion polls support as joining the Russian equivalent -20%.
Adam smith would have looked at the opinion polls.
Thanks for reposting this. Skidelsky never disappoints. Brilliant, calm, equitable.
The one thing I might question is when he excuses the Poroshenko regime from oppressing the Russians/Russophone Ukrainians in the eastern oblasts. He writes that the regime was not committing genocide. No, of course not, but it was, if reports are true, committing mass murder and otherwise discriminating.
It's hard to focus on the Ukraine/Russia/Nato problem when my efforts are also focused on the slaughter of Palestinians by Israel/USA/ Western Europe and also my focus on America"s turn into fascism; a fight to the the death (of democrcy) by the red line between Democrats and Repuglicans as to which dominants the propaganda dialogue. Should I mention Thomas, your concern of EU unity vs nation-state independance. All the above chaos causes some folks to snap and the fire arms come out or the missiles/drones fly.
Homo sapiens: earth should have aborted us....maybe that's what she's doing now....slowly.
The USA: exports WOMD to kill Palestinians and its surrounding neighbors.
China wants to share and l8ve in a peacegul world. The USA wants to destroy
and dominate. We are a horrible nation state. China is not. Why can't I buy a chinease EV sedan in the USA. Why is my tax dollars used to kill and vaporize children in Gaza.WHY!
Top Exporters to Israel (2024)
1. China 🇨🇳
· Total Export Value: $19 billion
· Key Products: Electric vehicles, mobile phones, computers, and metals .
2. United States 🇺🇸
· Total Export Value: $9.4 billion
· Key Products: Explosive munitions, diamonds, electronics, and chemical products. A significant portion of U.S. military aid to Israel is spent on American-made weapons, which boosts these export figures .
3. Germany 🇩🇪
· Total Export Value: $5.6 billion
· Key Products: Vehicles, pharmaceutical products, machinery, and electronics .
4. Other Notable Exporters
· While the search results did not provide a complete list of countries beyond the top three, they indicate that Israel imported goods from 192 countries and territories in 2024 . Other significant partners likely include countries like Switzerland, Belgium, and India, which are traditionally strong trade partners with Israel, but their specific data was not highlighted in the provided search results.
Context and Trends
· Israel's total imports in 2024 were valued at $91.5 billion, making it a significant importer on the global stage .
· The trade relationship with China is particularly crucial, as China is Israel's largest source of imports, providing a wide range of consumer goods and electronics .
· Recent geopolitical tensions, such as those related to the war in Gaza and international pressure on Israel, have begun to influence trade policies. For instance, the UK suspended free trade negotiations with Israel in 2025, and the EU has considered reassessing its trade relationship . These developments could potentially alter future trade dynamics.
For a more detailed breakdown of specific products or trade values for countries beyond the top three, you can refer to the detailed trade data available from sources like the United Nations Comtrade database or Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics .
Yemen blocked "stuff other than WOMD" in the Red Sea. If being by a large margin the main exporter to Israel has no moral consequences, because those exports are not WOMD, what is the moral point of trying to stop ships, that do not carry WOMD, in the Red Sea? You cannot have both: either it is immoral trading with Israel (as China, Russia, India do), or it is immoral to stop trade with Israel (as Yemen does).
Whatever one thinks of the respective responsibilities of the two parties before the war, the piece leaves little doubt about the ‘impartial spectator’s view’ of who is to blame for starting the war and for the horrors that followed:
It is hard even for a sympathetic spectator to judge the invasion itself sympathetically. The provocation Putin complained of was never sufficient to warrant breaching Article 51 of the UN Charter. Whatever its genuine security concerns, Russia was never in danger of imminent attack either from Ukraine or NATO, nor were the Russian minorities on Ukraine threatened with genocide. And there is little to be said for the way the Russians have actually conducted their “special operation”.
Put in another way, this was a war of Putin’s choice, for which he has to accept responsibility, and for which Russia is paying a much higher price than Putin probably ever imagined, including in geostrategic terms, which Putin was supposed to master (the Baltic turned into a NATO lake, Russia cut off from the Southern Caucasus).
I’ve traveled extensively in the region and naturally, following it closely since the 2014 massacres and maidan shootings. My conclusion is 180 deg to yours
Where does this narrative about "invading Ukraine" come from? It is like saying that Houthis trying to liberate Gaza, "invade Israel". Russia interfered with Banderite conquest of Donbass, which was NOT Ukraine. Donetsk and Luhansk strongly objected to Ukrainian conquest and separated themselves. Banderites were furious and decided to bomb all Donbass civilians as "terrorists" and take Donbass as "the land without people", they mimicked Israel's actions in Palestine. Donbass republics asked Russia for protection and Russia interfered. They never "invaded" anybody. The West gives the Banderites unlimited power over the whole "territory" that has been made up. There cannot be any "sovereign and independent Ukraine" if the land is taken by conquest and civilian massacres. Russia interfered with Ukrainian Nazi conquest, not "invaded Ukraine".
Such narrative is even more untenable, when considering that the pro-Ukraine public, such as Wikipedia, is trying to reframe the war as starting in February 2014. At that time, the "Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation", which was a treaty and not a memorandum (wink wink), was in full force.
Article 12 of such treaty read: "Each High Contracting Party shall guarantee the right of persons belonging to ethnic minorities, individually or together with other persons belonging to ethnic minorities, freely to express, preserve and develop their ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious diversity and promote and develop their culture without being subjected to any attempts to assimilate them against their will." Ukraine clearly broke it.
Article 6: "Each High Contracting Party shall refrain from participating in, or supporting, any actions directed against the other High Contracting Party, and shall not conclude any treaties with third countries against the other Party. Neither Party shall allow its territory to be used to the detriment of the security of the other Party." Ukraine clearly broke it.
Since the circumstances of the treaty were the repression of Crimea in 1994, and the fact that Russia did not respond at the time solely because it was entangled in Chechnya, this is quite significant: it was a warning to Ukraine.
Also it seems to me that nobody actually read the Budapest Memorandum. The oft-cited Article 2: "none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine EXCEPT IN SELF DEFENCE OR OTHERWISE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS". Russia claims that it acted in accordance to the Charter, it never disavowed the memorandum.
My last, cheap shot: I do not blame Skidelsky for believing that there was no genocide in Donbass. I blame his father.
Yes the invasion arguments are an over simplification. The Ukraine gov have been attacking the Donbass from 2014. Absent also from the demonising the Rusdians stance is any mention of the Odessa massacre where Banderites attacked people in a building burning some people alive. Good points Lena
Thank you. About Odessa, I was told by the Ukro-Nazis that it was all fake. That they faked the victims. Even after they saw Paul Moreira's The Masks of the Revolution (that documents how it was done and how people were burned and killed if they tried to escape). Pretty much what Israelis say about Palestinian deaths. The similarity in ideology and mentality of "Ukraine" and Israel just screams in the face, so to speak. Here is a collection of what Ukrainian "leaders" say about Russian-speakers. (plus see the comment by "Fuchs" below, "eat shit vatnik" - vatnik is a derogatory slur for those who tell the truth about Ukrainian Nazism).
"Moskals to the knives" - en masse;
"Moskalyaka na gilyaka" - en masse;
"The enemy is Moscow" - Yarosh;
"I will raise the whole world, so that from this Russia was not left and a scorched field, the remaining Russians in Ukraine should be shot with atomic weapons" - Timoshenko;
"We must drive the Russian language into a ghetto" - Miroshnichenko;
"Shoot any Russian citizen in the head without talking" - Balashov;
"First deceive and then hang Crimeans" - deputy governor of Dnepropetrovsk region;
"Those who work in Russia will not be our allies anyway, so we don't care about their interests" - Parubiy;
"I would act much tougher. I would just shoot them" - Irina Farion;
"Hitler the Liberator" - Governor of Kherson;
"There is no need to talk to Donbass. It is necessary to destroy a million and a half inhabitants and then everything will be solved" - Butkevich;
"During the sabotage operation it is necessary to kill as many Russian citizens as possible" - Gritsenko;
"We must remember that there is a big 360-year Ukrainian-Russian war going on" - Sirotiuk;
"We have 14 percent of Ukrainians who indicated that their native language is Russian, that is the language of the occupier. This indicates a terrible mutation of their consciousness. This is 5 million degenerate Ukrainians." - Irina Faryon;
"We have one way - to destroy Moscow, that's what we live for" - Irina Faryon;
"We need to get used to being fascists, we will need to burn everyone" - Rada deputy Bereza;
"Russia is an age-old enemy of Ukraine" - Dmytro Yarosh; "Russia unleashed a war with Ukraine."
"Russia is an aggressor" - Poroshenko; "Their children will sit in basements" - Poroshenko;
"Killing the inhabitants of Donbass is a good deed" - false patriarch Filaret;
"We must make Donbass NOT livable" - Korchinsky;
"The more we kill Russians now, the less our children will have to kill them" - Ukrainian Ambassador to Kazakhstan Petro Vrublevsky.
Eat shit vatnik.
Absent from the conversation is the fact that Russia and Ukraine reached a deal prior to the hostilities, which would have kept Ukrainian territory intact, in exchange for alignment with Russia or rather the absence of alignment with the EU/NATO.
Clearly, Russia strongly opposes to have a (quasi) enemy entity at its underbelly and lose access to the Black Sea and transport routes down there.
Putin decided that the conditions were right, that the West is weak enough, and slammed his fist on the table. Obviously, who is or isn't in the right based on this or that international law or treaty matters not now. What now matters is who has a stronger economy and manpower.
It appears that the West has tragically miscalculated. Its grip on the rest of the world, through international organizations, the monetary system, and military power, has proved to be much weaker than assumed. More importantly, Russia has joined forces with the Non-West and is building an alternative order, that involves a promise of liberation from the Occidental yoke for all the countries that have been fucked over by the West for eons (that liberation might be a mirage, but still). Bottom line? It looks like the West has managed to pit the rest of the world against itself, in a situation where its economy is crumbling, industry non-existent, and manpower weakened by transmotherfuckerism. Way to go! Quite an achievement!
Russia demanded NATO withdrawal from countries that joined after 1997, which was and is laughable demand.
What's laughable is that NATO still exists. That organization should be disbanded and a major effort should be made between European countries to eliminate the East-West divide, even though - as I've heard - that's no small feat, as it goes back to the 11th-century Schism, which makes the enmity pretty deeply ingrained in the civilizational tapestry.
From where I'm standing, what's transpiring at the moment is not some rough patch that will be ironed out, whereupon business will go on as usual. There are too many accumulated societal and (geo)political problems, there is the energy predicament (the approaching end of the Oil Age), etc. Humankind seems to be in an inflection point.
The joining of NATO by Eastern European countries after 1997 is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, as are, actually, many other issues, including most of the shit discussed in the text.
A brand-new vision for humanity is needed, not only in regard to how nations will arrange their co-existence, but also how people will live when 'the trucks stop running', which is likely a reality in not too distant a future, say, 50 years from now.
Sadly, very few people see beyond the tip of their nose and focus on all sorts of red herrings, strawmen, and inconsequential bullshit.
This is an interesting exercise and may even help some Russian obsessives begin to think rationally about their attitudes and actions.
However, it ultimately comes down to an argument for and against the international piracy of US led Imperialism. Anyone arguing for more Imperialism at this point is a fool or a complete reactionary. Putin and Russia are not perfect, but they have come under the attack of Imperialism in the form of a literal and proud neo Nazi regime. There is no question they have every right to defend themselves until the aggressor is defeated.
To advance freedom and rationality in the world, Russia must defeat US Imperialism on its border. Russia fights for itself, but in the broader sense of our era, consciously or not, it's fights for humanity. The alternative to a powerful self defense against Imperialism, can be seen in Gaza. Without Russians, without the Chinese the world will look more and more like Gaza. Imperialism must perish if humanity is to flourish once again.
You need to clarify what you mean by Ukrainians. Do you mean a) the 50 million or so people who in 2014 lived in the country called Ukraine. Or b) the Ukrainian speaking virulently anti Russian people living in west Ukraine.
The a) Ukrainians in elections and opinion polls wanted to be neutral. Indeed in 2008 joining nato got the same opinion polls support as joining the Russian equivalent -20%.
Adam smith would have looked at the opinion polls.
Thanks for reposting this. Skidelsky never disappoints. Brilliant, calm, equitable.
The one thing I might question is when he excuses the Poroshenko regime from oppressing the Russians/Russophone Ukrainians in the eastern oblasts. He writes that the regime was not committing genocide. No, of course not, but it was, if reports are true, committing mass murder and otherwise discriminating.
It's hard to focus on the Ukraine/Russia/Nato problem when my efforts are also focused on the slaughter of Palestinians by Israel/USA/ Western Europe and also my focus on America"s turn into fascism; a fight to the the death (of democrcy) by the red line between Democrats and Repuglicans as to which dominants the propaganda dialogue. Should I mention Thomas, your concern of EU unity vs nation-state independance. All the above chaos causes some folks to snap and the fire arms come out or the missiles/drones fly.
Homo sapiens: earth should have aborted us....maybe that's what she's doing now....slowly.
The biggest trading partners of Israel (2024).
Biggest exporters of goods to Israel (i.e. those that make Israel still function):
1. China
2. USA
3. Germany
4. Italy
5. Turkey
6. Russia
7. France
8. South Korea
9. India
10. Spain
Biggest importers (i.e. those that pay Israeli services):
1. USA
2. China (incl. Hong Kong)
3. Ireland
4. The Netherlands
5. Germany
6. India
7. UK
8. Belgium
9. France
10. Italy
Moreover, it is difficult to believe that the bombing of Doha happened without the consent of Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
China: exports stuff other than WOMD.
The USA: exports WOMD to kill Palestinians and its surrounding neighbors.
China wants to share and l8ve in a peacegul world. The USA wants to destroy
and dominate. We are a horrible nation state. China is not. Why can't I buy a chinease EV sedan in the USA. Why is my tax dollars used to kill and vaporize children in Gaza.WHY!
Top Exporters to Israel (2024)
1. China 🇨🇳
· Total Export Value: $19 billion
· Key Products: Electric vehicles, mobile phones, computers, and metals .
2. United States 🇺🇸
· Total Export Value: $9.4 billion
· Key Products: Explosive munitions, diamonds, electronics, and chemical products. A significant portion of U.S. military aid to Israel is spent on American-made weapons, which boosts these export figures .
3. Germany 🇩🇪
· Total Export Value: $5.6 billion
· Key Products: Vehicles, pharmaceutical products, machinery, and electronics .
4. Other Notable Exporters
· While the search results did not provide a complete list of countries beyond the top three, they indicate that Israel imported goods from 192 countries and territories in 2024 . Other significant partners likely include countries like Switzerland, Belgium, and India, which are traditionally strong trade partners with Israel, but their specific data was not highlighted in the provided search results.
Context and Trends
· Israel's total imports in 2024 were valued at $91.5 billion, making it a significant importer on the global stage .
· The trade relationship with China is particularly crucial, as China is Israel's largest source of imports, providing a wide range of consumer goods and electronics .
· Recent geopolitical tensions, such as those related to the war in Gaza and international pressure on Israel, have begun to influence trade policies. For instance, the UK suspended free trade negotiations with Israel in 2025, and the EU has considered reassessing its trade relationship . These developments could potentially alter future trade dynamics.
For a more detailed breakdown of specific products or trade values for countries beyond the top three, you can refer to the detailed trade data available from sources like the United Nations Comtrade database or Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics .
"China: exports stuff other than WOMD."
Yemen blocked "stuff other than WOMD" in the Red Sea. If being by a large margin the main exporter to Israel has no moral consequences, because those exports are not WOMD, what is the moral point of trying to stop ships, that do not carry WOMD, in the Red Sea? You cannot have both: either it is immoral trading with Israel (as China, Russia, India do), or it is immoral to stop trade with Israel (as Yemen does).
Eat shit vatnik.
Yes I can....starve the beast like Israel is starving Gazians.
Starve Isreal to death via BSD.
Down with an apartheid zionist nation state.
Refuse Fascism
Oppose Oppression
Whatever one thinks of the respective responsibilities of the two parties before the war, the piece leaves little doubt about the ‘impartial spectator’s view’ of who is to blame for starting the war and for the horrors that followed:
It is hard even for a sympathetic spectator to judge the invasion itself sympathetically. The provocation Putin complained of was never sufficient to warrant breaching Article 51 of the UN Charter. Whatever its genuine security concerns, Russia was never in danger of imminent attack either from Ukraine or NATO, nor were the Russian minorities on Ukraine threatened with genocide. And there is little to be said for the way the Russians have actually conducted their “special operation”.
Put in another way, this was a war of Putin’s choice, for which he has to accept responsibility, and for which Russia is paying a much higher price than Putin probably ever imagined, including in geostrategic terms, which Putin was supposed to master (the Baltic turned into a NATO lake, Russia cut off from the Southern Caucasus).
I’ve traveled extensively in the region and naturally, following it closely since the 2014 massacres and maidan shootings. My conclusion is 180 deg to yours